P. v. Cardoza
After appellant drove a stolen car and attempted to avoid arrest, defendant entered a negotiated plea of no contest to evading a peace officer while driving in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property, with the understanding that he would receive the low term prison sentence, which would be doubled if the court found true an allegation he previously committed a carjacking, a strike offense. Thereafter, the court found the strike allegation true, and defendant received an aggregate sentence of 32 months.
On appeal, defendant contends that, after he pled no contest but before trial of his strike offense, he made a Faretta[1] motion to represent himself, which the court erred in denying. We find no error and affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Cardoza