Pruitt

Pruitt v. Pliler

Good Law
178 F. App'x 752
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 8, 2006No. 05-55929California1,279 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

The State of California appeals the district court’s grant of habeas corpus relief to Petitioner Chet Randall Pruitt. The district court found that Petitioner’s Sixth Amendment rights were violated when the state trial court granted, but later revoked, Petitioner’s request to represent himself at trial. The district court found that the California Court of Appeal’s holding that Petitioner’s request was untimely was contrary to clearly established Supreme Court precedent in Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 , 95 S.Ct. 2525 , 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975). The district court also found that the appellate court’s conclusion that Petitioner made his request only to delay proceedings was not entitled to a presumption of correctness, see 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (e)(1), or supported by the record. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

On May 22, 1998, Petitioner made a Faretta request, asking that he be permitted to represent himself at trial. Judge Sheldon, in charge of the master calendar for criminal matters, responded that he would “take that up next week” and “[ljeave it the 12th and 15th.” On June 10, 1998, Judge Dougherty addressed Petitioner’s Faretta…

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.