Harrison

People v. Harrison

Good Law
155 Cal. Rptr. 3d 632·2013 Cal. App. LEXIS 298·215 Cal. App. 4th 647·2013 WL 1680278
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 18, 2013No. A132915California3,261 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Humes, J.

A jury convicted defendant Jamaal Rex Harrison of sex offenses in connection with attacks on four women over a period of two years, and he was sentenced to 100 years to life in prison. On appeal, Harrison argues that his convictions must be reversed because the trial court declined to substitute his second appointed counsel, advised him improperly during the brief time when he was allowed to represent himself, failed to adequately continue the trial date, and prohibited him from questioning the victims about whether they had engaged in prostitution. He also argues that his defense counsel was ineffective and that the prosecutor engaged in misconduct. We reject each of these claims and affirm.

In the published portion of this opinion, we conclude that the trial court had no duty to inform Harrison of his option to request advisory counsel after it granted his request to represent himself.

I.

Factual and Procedural Background

A. Jane Doe No. 1

About 10:00 p.m. on April 4, 2006, 14-year-old Jane Doe No. 1 was waiting for a bus at 104th Avenue and International Boulevard in Oakland as *650 she was returning home from her boyfriend’s house. Harrison attacked her by…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.