P. v. Smith
Bennie Smith (Smith) appeals his conviction for selling a controlled substance in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11352, subdivision (a).[1] On two occasions, Smith asked to represent himself, one time specifically invoking his right under Faretta v. California (1975) 422 U.S. 806 (Faretta). His second Faretta motion was granted. On appeal, Smith contends that his two Faretta motions were actually motions for appointment of new counsel under People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 (Marsden) and that those motions should have been granted. After reviewing the record and Smiths arguments, we find no error and affirm. When a defendant makes a Faretta motion, it does not obligate the trial court to conduct a Marsden hearing. And even if Smiths second Faretta motion could be construed as a Marsden motion, the trial court would have been justified in denying it.
Comments on P. v. Smith