P. v. Carter
A jury convicted defendant Orlanders Carter of making a criminal threat under Penal Code[1] section 422. On appeal, Carter claims the trial court violated his constitutional and statutory rights when it rejected defense counsel's request to conduct a section 1368 competency hearing after Carter refused to follow counsel's advice and testify at trial. Carter also claims the court violated his constitutional rights when it denied his objection to the prosecution's use of a peremptory challenge. Finally, he claims there is insufficient evidence in the record to show he possessed the requisite intent to support a conviction for violation of section 422.
Court conclude the trial court acted well within its discretion when it extensively questioned Carter outside the presence of the jury, found he understood the nature of the proceedings and the evidence against him, and found he understood that his decision not to testify was against the advice of defense counsel. Court thus conclude the trial court was not presented with a substantial change of circumstances or with new evidence that gave rise to a "serious doubt" about the validity of Carter's competency.
We also conclude that Carter did not make a prima facie showing of purposeful discrimination by the prosecution in exercising its peremptory challenges to prospective jurors, and that there is substantial evidence in the record to support the jury's verdict that Carter made a criminal threat under section 422. Court thus affirm the judgment of conviction.
Comments on P. v. Carter