In re Christensen CA4/3

California Court of Appeal Sep 10, 2014 No. G049928Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding that petitioner failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel regarding his speedy trial rights, the exclusion of evidence of prior convictions, or the failure to object to alleged prosecutorial misconduct.

Issues

Did counsel provide ineffective assistance by waiving time for a speedy trial?
Did counsel provide ineffective assistance by agreeing to exclude evidence of prior convictions?
Did counsel provide ineffective assistance by failing to object to alleged prosecutorial misconduct?

Disposition. denied

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“We disagree with the assertion that defense counsel should have had the prescience to know another victim was out there and might come forward before the retrial of the Joshua counts.”

“There was no perfectly safe or obvious tactic to take.”

“That being the case, there was no ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to object to the prosecution’s statements at the time of trial.”

Filed 9/10/14 In re Christensen CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

In re SCOTT ANDREW CHRISTENSEN G049928

on Habeas Corpus. (Super. Ct. Nos. 06SF0747, 09CF0222)

OPINION

Original proceedings; petition for a writ of habeas corpus to challenge a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Gary S. Paer, Judge. Petition denied. Law Offices of Ronald A. Ziff, Ronald A. Ziff and Abby Besser Klein for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. * * *

Petitioner Scott Andrew Christensen was convicted of multiple counts of lewd acts upon a child under the age of 14 (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a)) and sentenced to 27 years to life. In his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, petitioner argues he was denied effective assistance of counsel because his counsel: (1) failed to pursue his speedy trial rights; (2) agreed to the exclusion of evidence that he had already been convicted with respect to an uncharged offense; and (3) failed to object to prosecutorial misconduct. The petition is denied. I FACTS Petitioner also has filed an appeal from the judgment against him (People v. Scott Andrew Christensen (Sept. 10, 2014, G048615, G048616) __ Cal.App.4th __ (Companion Appeal). The facts of this case are set forth more fully in the opinion in the Companion Appeal, being filed concurrently herewith. II DISCUSSION A. Request for Judicial Notice: In the body of his petition, petitioner requests this court to take judicial notice of the record in the Companion Appeal. That request does not comply with California Rules of Court, rule 8.252. (Kinney v. Overton (2007) 153 Cal.App.4th 482, 497, fn. 7.) However, by order of July 18, 2014, we notified the prosecution that this court, on its own motion, intended to take notice of the record in the Companion Appeal. No objection having been received, we hereby take judicial notice of the record in the Companion Appeal.

In re Christensen CA4/3

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

OPINION

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

MOORE, ACTING P. J.

IKOLA, J.

THOMPSON, J.

AI Brief