P.

DISCUSSION

I. Denial of Faretta Motion

A. Facts

On the first day of trial, defense counsel informed the court that Chestang wished

to bring a motion for substitution of appointed counsel under People v. Marsden (1970) 2

Cal.3d 118 (Marsden). The trial court conducted a Marsden hearing outside the presence

of the prosecutor. Chestang complained that defense counsel continuously told him that

he had "a no-win case." He stated that counsel had a "nonchalant attitude to questions"

2 he posed regarding the case, telling him, "[H]ow does that help[?] I don't see it, a jury

won't buy it, the jury won't agree to it." Chestang complained that counsel failed to

obtain photographs and fingerprint evidence. Chestang did not feel that counsel had

conducted a thorough investigation or that he had "an effective defense strategy."

Chestang believed that counsel had not "aggressively pursued anything as far as just

trying to get [him] off" and just pressured him to "take a deal" in the case.

Defense counsel responded to Chestang's allegations, explaining that he visited

Chestang a couple of times, discussed the case with him, inquired about witnesses…