California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Meza, B250365 (Cal. App. 2015):
Defendant asserted his right to represent himself the day the jury returned its verdicts. On two occasions, the trial court specifically asked the defendant how much time he would need to be ready for sentencing and any posttrial motions; both times, defendant asked for 30 days and both times the trial court granted his request. Defendant argues on appeal that the trial court abused its discretion in not granting him a third postponement, even though defendant had already been given 70 days to prepare for the hearing, defendant had not demonstrated any progress on the matters he sought to present at the hearing, and defendant was granted leeway to present any arguments orally at the hearing. Based on this record, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that defendant had not demonstrated "good cause" for a further continuance.
Page 8
(People v. Alexander (2010) 49 Cal.4th 846, 934; 1050, subd. (e) [requiring "good cause" for a continuance].)
The judgment is affirmed.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.