P. v. Morales
Following a jury trial, defendant Arthur Moses Morales was convicted of attempted carjacking. (Pen. Code,[2] 664, 215, subd. (a).) The jury further found true the allegations that defendant had one prior strike ( 667, subds. (c) & (e)(1), 1170.12, subd. (c)(1)), had previously been convicted of a serious or violent felony ( 667, subd. (a)), and had served three prior prison terms ( 667.5, subd. (b)). On July 12, 2005, the trial court sentenced defendant to a total of 17 years in state prison.
Defendant appeals,[3]contending: (1) the trial court failed to secure a knowing and intelligent waiver of counsel before allowing him to represent himself at trial; (2) the trial court violated his due process rights by limiting his closing argument; (3) the trial court invaded the province of the jury when it commented on the evidence after the jury appeared deadlocked; (4) the trial court improperly imposed the upper term in violation of Cunningham v. California (2007) 549 U.S. 270 [127 S.Ct. 856, 166 L.Ed.2d 856]; and (5) the cumulative error doctrine requires reversal. Because we agree with defendants third claim that the trial court invaded the province of the jury when it commented on the evidence after the jury appeared deadlocked, Court reverse. Accordingly, Court need not address defendants other contentions.
Comments on P. v. Morales