People v. Coleman CA1/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 28, 2022A159933California7,603 words

Opinion

Opinion

Banke, J.

DISCUSSION

Sixth Amendment Violations Faretta Motion At an April 2018 hearing, the court was set to hear defendant’s Faretta request, when defendant stated, “I requested this court date, and I did not

2 We summarize here only the general background facts. We discuss additional facts pertaining to the issues raised on appeal in the next section as needed. 3All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.

2 know this court date was even put on for anything. And I haven’t seen [defense counsel] since the day that we failed at the bail hearing. I’m here for a Marsden motion.”4 The court replied, “So that’s a separate issue then. So my suggestion is we take up the Marsden first, and then we deal with the Faretta.”5 Towards the end of the Marsden hearing, the following colloquy occurred: “DEFENDANT: . . . I want a private attorney, and I want my case reheard. “THE COURT: We haven’t made a determination as to whether you’re going to represent yourself. “DEFENDANT: I will go pro per. I will absolutely go pro per. “THE COURT: Are we back then to [the] Faretta motion? “DEFENDANT: I don’t even know what that means. “THE COURT: Are you asking to represent…

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.