Opinion ID: 2520047
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: March 27, 1992 Hearing

Text: During the penalty phase, after the prosecution had presented its case and defense counsel had examined four witnesses, defendant filed a two-page handwritten letter requesting a hearing outside the presence of the prosecutor. This request occurred after counsel informed the court that defendant intended to testify, against counsel's advice. In the letter to the court, defendant stated: Before I go on with this case `as of taking the stand' I'd like to give you a written testimony of this whole case. He began, I did give you a few things to consider on a Marsden hearing! And as I did say my attorney didn't surround this case to his best. Defendant attempted to rebut the prosecution's penalty phase evidence. He concluded, my testimony would consider of letting the jury know how a life in prison can be. Out of 5 years I got in trouble only ones. In a P.S. section, he wrote, Can we have a meeting without the prosecutor !? being present? At the hearing, counsel responded to defendant's attempt in his letter to rebut the prosecution's penalty phase evidence. Counsel informed the court that he had discussed the various incidents with defendant. As a result of these conversations, in which defendant had admitted much of what the prosecutor was seeking to prove, counsel concluded that there was not much he could do because the events basically took place in sum and substance. Defendant responded by denying the prosecutor's allegation that he had stabbed someone in county jail. At this point the following colloquy took place: The Court: Mr. Valdez, excuse me for just a minute. What's your motion? Is your motion one to relieve Mr. Robusto so that you can proceed to represent yourself in this matter? The Defendant: My thing here is that I didn't have witnesses. The Court: Have you given  All right. In regard to witnesses, have you given to Mr. Robusto or to his investigator the names or any identifying information whereby they could talk to any witnesses? The Defendant: This is short notice. The Court: I didn't ask you that. Have you done that? The Defendant: No, I haven't. After a continued discussion about witnesses, the court again asked defendant why he requested a hearing. The Court: What's your specific motion? What do you want the court to do? The Defendant: Well, first of all, I asked for a mistrial on the detective. He got up there and mentioned about the prison to the jury, and I asked for a mistrial on that. The Court: We're not talking about that. You gave me a letter this morning. We're only talking about the contents of the letter. [¶] Why did you give me the letter? What did you do you want the court to do? The Defendant: I wanted the court to take into consideration that I haven't had a fair trial in this, that I didn't have the surrounding of this case, the defense that I was supposed to have. The Court: That motion is denied. The court finds quite to the contrary, that you have had one of the best defenses that this court has seen, that the comments raised in your letter that's been identified as number 66 are incorrect, that they are misleading and insufficient.