Opinion ID: 2585200
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Trial court's failure to inquire into adequacy of resources available to defendant

Text: Defendant contends he was denied his rights under the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution by the trial court's failure, despite his repeated complaints, to inquire into the adequacy of the law library and the sufficiency of the ancillary services available to him. Defendant argues the court's failure, coupled with the actual inadequacy of those resources, deprived him of his due process right to meaningful access to the courts and his Sixth Amendment right as a self-represented defendant to an opportunity to prepare his defense. ( Bounds v. Smith (1977) 430 U.S. 817, 828, 97 S.Ct. 1491, 52 L.Ed.2d 72 [right of meaningful access to courts entails providing prisoners with adequate law libraries or adequate assistance from persons trained in the law]; Milton v. Morris (9th Cir.1985) 767 F.2d 1443, 1445 [right to self-representation premised upon the right to make a defense].) [18] Defendant further contends the trial court's error affected his Eighth Amendment right to a reliable determination of guilt and penalty. We conclude that, under the circumstances of this case, defendant was denied no constitutional rights by any lack of inquiry into the resources available to him and that he has not shown those resources in fact were inadequate. As the Attorney General points out, whenever defendant voiced complaints about his lack of access to the jail law library, the means to review tape recordings of interviews with prosecution witnesses, or access to witnesses, the trial court made an effort to address his concerns. For example, on August 21, 23, and 29, 1989, prior to the commencement of trial, when defendant complained he had not been permitted to use the jail law library, the trial court entered orders that he be allowed access to the library at reasonable times consistent with the jail's security requirements. On September 5, 1989, when defendant requested transcripts of all tapes of law enforcement interviews of potential witnesses in the case, the court noted for the record that defendant would be allowed to have a tape recorder in the jail; defendant acknowledged he wished to listen to the actual recordings, and the court implicitly indicated it would entertain a request for transcripts if defendant subsequently concluded he needed them. When defendant sought the court's authorization to interview witnesses adjacent to the courtroom every morning between 9:30 and 10:00, the trial court noted that time was impracticable due to the court's schedule, but offered defendant the opportunity to interview witnesses in the jury room between 4:00 and 5:00 p.m. each day. The court also asked the bailiff to inquire what facilities might be available at the jail. Thereafter, the court informed defendant there was a room available at the jail for such interviews; alternatively, in order to avoid subjecting witnesses to search, defendant could interview them by telephone at the jail, and the court ordered that any telephone defendant used for this purpose be disconnected from the jail recording system. The court observed that witnesses could be compelled by subpoena to appear at the jail for interviews. When defendant complained that his investigator, Larry Cahill, was not meeting with him daily, the court corrected his misunderstanding of its earlier order (which had been that Cahill report directly, not daily, to defendant) and invited defendant to bring to the court's attention any matter defendant needed discovered. Defendant made no further complaints about his interaction with Cahill. When defendant complained about the inadequacy of the jail law library, the court reminded him that Advisory Counsel Winston could be called on to find materials unavailable to defendant. In sum, the record reflects that the trial court promptly addressed each complaint defendant raised. Defendant thus fails to demonstrate that the trial court should have inquired more fully into the resources available to him.