P. v. Washington
Filed 7/18/06 P. v. Washington CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ROY WASHINGTON, Defendant and Appellant. |
F048368
(Super. Ct. No. BF108531A)
OPINION |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. James M. Stuart, Judge.
Robert Derham, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jo Graves, Assistant Attorney General, David A. Rhodes and Barton Bowers, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
-ooOoo-
Appellant Roy Washington was convicted by jury of petty theft with a prior, a violation of Penal Code[1] section 666. Appellant admitted a prior theft conviction. In a bifurcated proceeding, the court found appellant had served five prior prison terms within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (b).
On March 14, 2005, appellant sought to have his appointed counsel relieved and new counsel substituted. (People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118.) The motion was denied. On April 12, 2005, the court granted a second Marsden motion and relieved counsel. New counsel was appointed for the limited purpose of advising appellant on whether to bring a motion for new trial. A new trial motion was brought and denied.
At sentencing, the court imposed the lower term of 16 months, plus one year for each of the five prior prison term enhancements, for a total term of six years, four months.
The facts of the underlying offense are not pertinent to the single issue raised on appeal. In brief, appellant stole saw blades from a Home Depot store in Bakersfield. Appellant claimed he was attempting to return the blades.
Discussion
Procedural facts
At the April 12, 2005, sentencing hearing, the trial court began by announcing its tentative sentence of four years. Then it considered appellant's motion to relieve counsel. The court stated, â€
