Hojnowski

People v. Hojnowski

Good Law
175 Cal. Rptr. 3d 706·2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 705·228 Cal. App. 4th 794·2014 WL 3823724
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 4, 2014No. A139455California2,254 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Needham, J.

*797 Opinion

After appellant Joseph Hojnowski was found competent to stand trial, a jury convicted him of three counts of aggravated battery by “gassing” under Penal Code section 4501.1, 1 which is statutorily defined as “intentionally placing or throwing, or causing to be placed or thrown, upon the person of another, any human excrement or other bodily fluids or bodily substances . . . that results in actual contact with the person’s skin or membranes.” (§ 4501.1, subd. (b).) In a bifurcated proceeding, the jury also found true allegations appellant had suffered a prior conviction under the “Three Strikes” law and had served a prior prison term. (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, 667.5, subd. (b).)

In this appeal from the judgment sentencing him to prison for an aggregate term of 11 years, appellant contends (1) the trial court should have declared a doubt as to his mental competency and suspended criminal proceedings before the trial began, even though he had previously been found competent; (2) the court’s denial of his motion for self-representation under Faretta v. California (1975) 422 U.S. 806 [ 45 L.Ed.2d 562 , 95 S.Ct. 2525 ] was an effective declaration of doubt as to…

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.