People v. Negron CA2/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 22, 2022B322510California8,318 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

I. Competency to Stand Trial and for Self-Representation

Defendant raises three arguments related to his competency to stand trial and to represent himself. He contends

Because defendant does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence underlying his conviction for the charged offense— battery by a prisoner on a nonconfined person—and the great- bodily-injury enhancement, we provide only a brief summary of the facts adduced at trial.

3 that the trial court erred by (1) failing to suspend proceedings and conduct a new competency hearing after learning that defendant was no longer taking medication and was displaying bizarre behavior; (2) allowing defendant to represent himself at a hearing on July 8, 2019, after the prosecutor raised a doubt as to defendant’s competence; and (3) permitting defendant to represent himself at trial. A. Background 1. Doubt as to defendant’s competency At a pre-preliminary hearing on December 6, 2017, defendant petitioned to represent himself. During the ensuing colloquy, defendant claimed that he had previously represented himself when Google Earth attempted to prosecute him. He stated that Google Earth was watching and listening…

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.