Right to Counsel: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
"[M]erely express[ing] some unhappiness with certain aspects of counsel's handling of his case" is not a Marsden hearing request. (People v. Wright (1990) 52 Cal.3d 367, 410, disapproved on other grounds in People v. Williams (2011) 49 Cal.4th 405.) | "[M]erely express[ing] some unhappiness with certain aspects of counsel's handling of his case" is not a Marsden hearing request. (People v. Wright (1990) 52 Cal.3d 367, 410, disapproved on other grounds in People v. Williams (2011) 49 Cal.4th 405.) | ||
Defendant can waive Marsden by failing to notify court. (''People v. Jones'' (2012) 210 Cal.App.4th 355; ''People v. Vera'' (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 970, 981-2.) | |||
Revision as of 23:20, 8 July 2021
blah
blah
Indigent defendants
People v. Washington (2019) 34 Cal.App.5th 311
McCoy v. Louisiana (2018) 138 S.Ct. 1500
People v. Bernal, H045620, 12/5/19 The client's disagreement with counsel must be part of the record.
People v. Palmer; D074240; 5/22/20; C/A 4th, Div. 1
In re Smith; E073871; 5/26/20; C/A 4th, Div. 2
Marsden motion to substitute appointed counsel
"[T]he court must allow the accused to give specific reasons why he wishes replacement of his appointed counsel. (People v. Montiel (1993) 5 Cal.4th 877, 906, disapproved on other grounds in People v. Sanchez (2016) 63 Cal.4th 665, 679.) But court doesn't have a sua sponte duty.
"[M]erely express[ing] some unhappiness with certain aspects of counsel's handling of his case" is not a Marsden hearing request. (People v. Wright (1990) 52 Cal.3d 367, 410, disapproved on other grounds in People v. Williams (2011) 49 Cal.4th 405.)
Defendant can waive Marsden by failing to notify court. (People v. Jones (2012) 210 Cal.App.4th 355; People v. Vera (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 970, 981-2.)