Cordova

Cordova v. Baca

Good Law
346 F.3d 924·2003 WL 22283867
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 6, 2003No. 02-55713California3,494 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Kozinski, J.

We must evaluate under AEDPA a state court’s decision to apply harmless error review where a criminal defendant was not represented by counsel at trial, following a defective waiver of his right to counsel.

Facts

Petitioner Henry Cordova was arrested outside his home after an altercation involving his neighbors. He was handcuffed by a Deputy Sheriff and placed in the back seat of a patrol car. After the deputy entered the ear and sat in the driver’s *925 seat, Cordova either sneezed (his story) or spit (the deputy’s story), as a result of which something unsavory landed on the deputy’s face.

Cordova was charged in the South Bay Municipal Court with three misdemeanor counts of battery — two on his neighbors, the third on the deputy. Cordova was not eligible for representation by the Public Defender, and he vacillated as to whether he would hire a lawyer or represent himself. The trial judge, everyone agrees, did not admonish him as required by Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 , 95 S.Ct. 2525 , 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975), which held that a criminal defendant wanting to represent himself “should be made aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, so that…

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.