Opinion ID: 2632308
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Defendant's request for a continuance to find an attorney

Text: After granting defendant's motion to remove Burns as defendant's lead counsel, the trial court announced its intention to appoint Richard Grossberg. The judge described Grossberg as having a long legacy of having handled homicide matters, and being an amiable individual who could probably get along with defendant. Mark Chambers, the second counsel, explained that he and defendant had interviewed several attorneys. He asked for a 15 minute delay so that one of those attorneys, Mr. Mueller, could arrive, but the judge replied, [I]f Mr. Mueller was present, I would have to tell him, weighing the two, I would appoint Mr. Grossberg anyway. Mr. Grossberg has far more experience. The court said that another attorney suggested by Chambers, Mr. Mills, was well qualified but was not present and had not indicated a willingness to take the assignment. At the hearing defendant did not object to Grossberg's appointment other than to note he was not among the attorneys defendant and Chambers had interviewed. Now defendant claims that Grossberg was not qualified because he had tried only one capital case, and that trial had occurred before the United States Supreme Court decided Furman v. Georgia (1972) 408 U.S. 238, 92 S.Ct. 2726, 33 L.Ed.2d 346. But Grossberg's qualifications would depend on his experience in trying criminal cases, not just his experience in capital cases, and an attorney with a long legacy of handling homicide cases may be qualified to take on a capital case. Grossberg was one of three San Diego County attorneys classified by the public defender as Class VIqualified to handle a capital case. The trial court gave defendant the opportunity to express his views on who should be appointed. (See People v. Chavez (1980) 26 Cal.3d 334, 346-347, 161 Cal. Rptr. 762, 605 P.2d 401.) Chambers mentioned the names of some attorneys, but offered no reason why they would be a better choice than Grossberg. Under these circumstances, having found a competent attorney who was willing to serve as lead counsel, the trial court had no obligation to continue the proceedings to consider other possible appointees.