People v. Bloom

48 Cal.3d 1194 (1989)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

After D was convicted of his criminal conduct, he requested that he be allowed to represent himself for the penalty phase with his attorney to remain as co-counsel. D then stated that he did not want to put on a defense because he did not want to spend his natural life in some institution and that if granted self-representation he would help the prosecution obtain the death sentence. Defense counsel stated that he would be willing to inform the jury of D's choice of the death penalty and that D would always be capable of taking the stand to plead for the death sentence. The court recessed and then adjourned the next day and then granted the request finding that D possessed sufficient intellect to understand the proceedings, to read and to write, and to address the court and the jury. The court found that D understood the gravity of the situation. The court was then informed that the defense attorney was instructed not to call any witnesses and the defense attorney informed the court he was standing by to aid his client and inform him of procedures and how to address the court. The trial court informed D that he was making a grave mistake but allowed him to represent himself. The death sentence was imposed; there was evidence of mitigating circumstances on the record. During psychiatric evaluations, D indicated that he sought the death sentence to expedite his appeal to this court. The examining psychiatrists indicated that D was confident that this court would overturn the case the sooner it gets up there. D now appeals based on the failure to present mitigating circumstances along with his own request to represent himself deprived him of his right to effective assistance of counsel and offended the state's interest in ensuring the reliability of capital penalty determinations.