People v. Harper CA4/2

statement of the case, and identifying one potentially arguable issue: whether the court

erred in not instructing the jury sua sponte with CALCRIM No. 1600 on the issue of

force.

Defendant was offered the opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which

he has done. Defendant contends (1) his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance of

counsel, (2) he had a conflict of interest with his trial counsel, (3) he should have been

sentenced to the “low term” instead of the midterm, and (4) he should qualify for “half-

time” credit. We affirm.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On April 9, 2021, defendant and the victim, defendant’s girlfriend with whom he

lived part-time, went out to a bar to watch a band play. By the time they left, defendant

was “pretty drunk.” Defendant opened the door while the victim was driving home and

“decided to try to jump out.” Defendant intentionally spilled a soda all over the console

of the victim’s car. According to the victim’s testimony, she hit defendant three times;

defendant attempted to defend himself. The victim called the police.

When defendant and the victim arrived at her home, the victim went inside.

Defendant…