(Super. Ct. No. 08F00662)
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hull , Acting P. J.
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
Defendant James Robert Williams, having been convicted by a jury of two counts of attempted robbery and related firearm enhancements in a first trial, and of additional firearm enhancements in a second trial, moved the trial court for substitution of counsel pursuant to People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 (Marsden) at the conclusion of the second trial. The trial court denied the motion.
On appeal, defendant contends the trial court failed to conduct the inquiry required under Marsden, and erroneously denied his motion for new counsel, thus violating his right to a fair trial and due process under the federal and state constitutions. We affirm the judgment.
Wearing a ski mask and carrying a revolver, defendant and Donald Santos attempted to rob a cigarette store while Jahmal Stanford acted as lookout. Defendant aimed his weapon at G.H., the operator of a check-cashing business located inside the cigarette store, who was squatting down under the counter attempting to hide. B.M., the owner of the cigarette store, retrieved his own gun from the back of the store and fired at Santos from behind a partition. Defendant fired a single shot, hitting G.H. in the head, and then ran away with Santos and Stanford. G.H. survived. Surgeons later recovered a .38 caliber bullet from his skull.
Defendant was charged with attempted murder (Pen. Code, §§ 664/187; undesignated statutory references that follow are to this code), and two counts of attempted robbery (§§ 664/211). The amended information alleged he was armed with a firearm (§ 12022.5, subd. (a)(1)), personally used a firearm (§ 12022.53, subd. (b)), personally and intentionally discharged a firearm (§ 12022.53, subd. (c)), and personally and intentionally discharged a firearm causing great bodily injury (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)).
A jury found defendant guilty of both counts of attempted robbery, but not guilty of attempted murder, and found true allegations that he personally used a firearm and was armed with a firearm. The jury deadlocked on allegations that defendant personally and intentionally discharged a firearm and personally and intentionally discharged a firearm causing great bodily injury pursuant to section 12022.53, subdivisions (c) and (d), respectively, and the trial court declared a mistrial as to those allegations.
Defendant was retried on the section 12022.53, subdivisions (c) and (d) allegations, and the jury found both true.
Defendant filed a joint Marsden motion and motion for new trial. Following an in camera hearing, the trial court denied both motions, and sentenced defendant to an ...