P. v. DeCosta
Christopher Dean DaCosta (Defendant) appeals a judgment following his jury convictions of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a))[1] and kidnapping (§ 207, subd. (a)). On appeal, he contends: (1) he was denied his constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel because his defense counsel did not competently investigate his defenses; (2) the trial court erred by denying his motion for new trial based on ineffective assistance of counsel; (3) he was denied his constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel when, in moving for a new trial, his new appointed counsel did not correct misstatements of law; (4) he was denied his constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel when his defense counsel did not request a pinpoint instruction on the felony murder doctrine; (5) the trial court erred by imposing consecutive sentences for his two offenses in violation of section 654; and (6) the abstract of judgment should be corrected to reflect the number of presentence custody credits to which he is entitled.
Comments on P. v. DeCosta