Opinion ID: 2602185
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The September 4, 1997, arraignment in municipal court

Text: On September 4, 1997, defendant was arraigned in the Municipal Court of the Santa Monica Judicial District, County of Los Angeles, before the Honorable Hiroshi Fujisaki, a superior court judge sitting as magistrate. Defendant informed the court that he desired to represent himself. The court responded that you're risking a lot if you don't have guidance of counsel. The court thereafter asked defendant whether he would permit the public defender's office to represent him. Defendant declined the court's offer, commenting: I will stand on my Faretta [ v. California (1975) 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562] rights and represent myself. I don't need the services of the public defender's office. The court informed defendant: [Y]ou're entitled to have a lawyer represent you at all stages of the proceedings. If you don't have the money for a lawyer, the Court will appoint a lawyer to represent you at no charge to you. (Italics added.) Defendant replied: I've elected to represent myself in pro per, your Honor. The court asked: Do you wish to be your own attorney? Defendant responded affirmatively. The court thereafter inquired: Do you understand if you choose to represent yourself, you are required to do everything that a lawyer would be required to do in representing you[?] That would include preparation of your defense, the cross examination of witnesses who would be called to testify against you. [¶] It would require the preparation of all the motions that you may need to make in writing, those that must be made in writing. You're going to be required to prepare subpoenas and to subpoena witnesses to appear in court on your behalf if you wish to offer any evidence. [1] You will have tobe responsible for the selection of a jury, selection of the jury instructions that will be presented to the jury. You'd be responsible for the examination of witnesses, cross-examination of witnesses[,] making opening and closing statements. [¶] And if you should be convicted, [self-representation] would require you to prepare your own requests such as they may be with regard to your sentencing. (Italics added.) Defendant stated that he understood the court's admonitions. [4] The court reiterated: You understand that you're not required to be your own attorney, that the Court will appoint a lawyer to represent you at public expense. That will be made available to you immediately if you wish to have the services of a lawyer. Do you understand that, sir? Defendant responded: Yes, and I thank you for it, but I elect to stand on my [Faretta ] rights at this time. I don't see any competent public defenders, you know, that I've met. Just don't strike me as, you know, able to go the whole road. So I can go to the penitentiary on my own. I don't need any help to go to prison. The court observed: Mr. Crayton, you seem to be knowledgeable about the law. You know something about the law? Defendant replied: I know that justice requires truth, your Honor, and I intend to lay the truth out before the jury and before the trier of fact in case we don't get to a jury. (Italics added.) Defendant reiterated his familiarity with Faretta v. California, supra, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562. The court asked the prosecutor to recite the list of constitutional rights that defendant intended to waive. The following colloquy ensued: Prosecutor: Mr. Crayton, again, you have a right to have an attorney at all stages of the proceeding. Do you understand that? Defendant: Yes, I do. Prosecutor: Do you give up the right to have a counsel, and you wish to assert your [Faretta ] rights and represent yourself? Defendant: That is correct. Prosecutor: You have a right to confront and cross-examine all the witnesses that would testify against you in this matter. Do you understand that? Defendant: Yes, I do. [¶] ... [¶] Prosecutor: If you don't have the money for an attorney, the Court will appoint you one. You understand that? Defendant: Yes, I do. Prosecutor: And you still don't want an attorney? Defendant: I have one. Prosecutor: Yourself. Defendant: Yes. Timothy Crayton is my attorney. Prosecutor: I'll just go through all the Miranda rights if he's going to make statements. Is that all right? The Court: Yes. Prosecutor: Okay. You have the right to confront and cross-examine all the witnesses who would testify against you in any of these matters, be it at the preliminary hearing or at the trial. You understand that? Defendant: Yes. Prosecutor: And you have the right to remain silent and the privilege against self-incrimination. Do you understand that? Defendant: Yes. The court thereafter gave defendant the following additional admonitions. You have the right to a trial by jury on this matter. At this stage, you are being arraigned, and you will be given a preliminary hearing, at which time, at the preliminary hearing, you have the right to be confronted by the witnesses, either directly or through the police officers testifying according to the Penal Code provisions allowing their testimony in lieu of the appearance of certain witnesses. At that preliminary hearing, you have the right to ask questions of the witnesses who are called, and you have the right to require that the prosecutor prove to the judge at the preliminary hearing that there is sufficient evidence to believe that you committed any of these offenses before you could be held to answer to stand trial in the superior court. If they cannot prove that you are the person who is charged in these offenses and that these offenses did occur, then the complaint must be dismissed. If the prosecutor proves these things, then you would be held to answer. Then you would be bought to the superior court within two weeks, 14 days, for arraignment again in the superior court, and then when you are arraigned in the superior court, you would be entitled to be brought to trial within 60 days from that arraignment date. If you're not brought to trial within that time, you have the right to have the case dismissed, unless you agree or you request a postponement that carries the case beyond that time. At the trialas I said before, you have the right to trial by jury, if you wish it. The jury consists of 12 citizens selected by you and the prosecutor and the judge in a process called voir dire examination. The jury will listen to the evidence presented to it by the prosecutor and any evidence that you may wish to offer, if you wish to offer any evidence. During that trial process, you're going to have the obligation to protect yourself with regard to [r]ules of [e]vidence and the competency of witnesses. Since you're not a lawyer, I caution you that those rules are technical, and if you don't raise the objections, you may have given up the rights you may have under the [r]ules of [e]vidence, and evidence may come out at the trial that ordinarily a lawyer could keep out, but you would not have kept out because you may not have understood the [r]ules of [e]vidence. And you would not be able to later complain that you were ... inadequately represented by yourself because you chose to represent yourself. That's the problem with the Faretta right, you understand. If you choose to represent yourself and you do a bad job or an inadequate job, you can't ask for a new trial because you did an inadequate job. I'm not saying that you're going to do an inadequate job. I'm just saying that you're going to be stuck with what you do or don't do. Do you understand that, sir? (Italics added.) Defendant: Yes I do. I understand. I might have a fool for a client, but in this case, I'd like to do that.... I don't need no help to go to prison. I can go to prison by myself.... I don't need assistance to go to prison. The court thereafter provided further admonitions, as follows. Now, after we get to that point of the trial where you're presenting evidence if you want to and the prosecutor has presented the evidence, at the end of the case, you have the right to submit jury instructions. Jury instructions are basically rules of law that you're asking the judge to present to the jury to use in deciding your case. You would have the obligation on your side to prepare the instructions you want and to object to any of the instructions the prosecutor submits if you don't feel that they are proper instructions. Okay. And if you don't object, you've given up the right to appeal that. When the verdict comes down, if it's adverse to you and you are convicted, you have the right to be sentenced within 21 days. You also have the right to the preparation of a probation report in the sentencing. Ifafter a probation report is ordered, you have the right to present to the probation department any information that would be helpful with regard to your sentencing, whatever they're going to recommend. You ... have the right to input into the probation report. (Italics added.) Defendant: Yes, sir.