P. v. Green
Appellant John Deroy Green III challenges his numerous forgery, grand theft, and obtaining money by false pretenses convictions on the grounds of insufficient evidence, lack of jurisdiction, and asserted trial court error in failing to conduct an adequate hearing regarding jury misconduct, failing to respond to a question from the jury during deliberations, denying a request to appoint substitute counsel, sentencing him on two counts each with respect to victims Headlee and Hestmark, and imposing consecutive sentences based on facts not found by the jury.
Court conclude substantial evidence supports appellants conviction pertaining to victim Hestmark. A juror who read about contracts in the courthouse law library did not commit misconduct. The trial court prejudicially erred by ignoring a question from the jury during deliberations. It acted within its discretion, however, by denying appellants motion for substitution of appointed counsel. The court permissibly sentenced appellant on multiple counts pertaining to victims Headlee and Hestmark, as the offenses were committed at widely separated times. Substantial evidence supports a finding of jurisdiction over the crimes against Headlee and Hestmark. Appellants consecutive terms do not violate due process.
Comments on P. v. Green