California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Harbolt, 206 Cal.App.3d 140, 253 Cal.Rptr. 390 (Cal. App. 1988):
We have reviewed and considered the remaining contentions Harbolt raises in his pro. per. petition for writ of habeas corpus: (1) the district attorney failed to prove the prior convictions for offenses committed in foreign jurisdictions included the elements of the corresponding California felonies; (2) the jury instruction on the lesser-included offense for grand theft auto was erroneous; (3) the trial court erred in failing to conduct a hearing on Harbolt's mental and physical competency for self-representation; (4) the trial court erred in imposing a felony term for the section 484e, subdivision (2), count; (5) the trial court erred in refusing to allow expert testimony on eye-witness identification; (6) the trial court erred in upholding the suspension of Harbolt's pro. per. telephone privileges, and (7) the trial court erred in denying Harbolt's motion pursuant to People v. Hitch (1974) 12 Cal.3d 641, 117 Cal.Rptr. 9, 527 P.2d 361.
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.