People v. Sims CA2/1

BACKGROUND

Because this is a second appeal, we need not provide a detailed account of the principal facts related to the charged offenses or the proceedings below as our prior opinion contains such a discussion. (People v. Sims, supra, B244905.) Instead, we take up where the record in the prior appeal left off.

I. In the first appeal, we directed the trial court to hold a Marsden hearing.

In the prior appeal, Sims asserted that the trial court had erred in refusing to conduct a Marsden hearing after he had advised the trial court that he had “new evidence” that could lead to a new trial. Because there had been no offer of proof or statement by Sims or defense counsel concerning the subject matter of his new trial motion and because the trial court had erred in failing to hold a Marsden hearing, we

All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.

2 remanded for the limited purpose of determining whether the Marsden motion should have been granted. We gave the following instructions: “If the court finds defendant’s Marsden motion is meritorious, the court is to permit defendant to substitute counsel and is to hold a hearing on…