P. v. Metcalf
Filed 5/22/06 P. v. Metcalf CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LEE CURTIS METCALF, Defendant and Appellant. | G035277 (Super. Ct. No. 04SF1075) O P I N I O N |
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Susanne S. Shaw, Judge. Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded for resentencing.
Thomas Owen, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, Raquel M. Gonzalez and Felicity Senoski, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Defendant Lee Curtis Metcalf challenges his conviction for grand theft and forgery. He contends the court erred by denying his request to substitute appointed counsel without conducting a proper inquiry of defense counsel. We disagree. The court gave him a full opportunity to explain his dissatisfaction with defense counsel. None of his complaints required the court to make any further inquiry. We thus affirm the judgment of conviction. Nonetheless, we reverse and remand for resentencing due to multiple conceded sentencing errors.
FACTS
Defendant obtained an ATM card, pin number, and a deposit slip for an acquaintance's checking account. He created seven counterfeit checks, which he deposited into the account. He used the ATM card to withdraw cash and make purchases from four stores. The bank's investigators contacted the acquaintance, who admitted giving her ATM card to defendant, and contacted the local authorities. The Orange County Sheriff's department arrested defendant at his apartment. Investigators recovered a computer containing a template for the counterfeit checks and several draft counterfeit checks made payable to the acquaintance and defendant. The District Attorney filed an information against defendant, charging him with five counts of grand theft (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (a))[1] -- one count as to the bank and four counts as to the stores -- and seven counts of forgery (§ 470, subd. (d)). The court appointed counsel for defendant.
Defendant sent a letter to defense counsel a month before trial, with a copy to the court. He wrote, â€