People v. Griffin CA2/1
Filed 4/15/22 P. v. Griffin CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
THE PEOPLE, B313855
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. ZM006097) v.
DAVID MARTIN GRIFFIN,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. James N. Bianco, Judge. Affirmed. Christian C. Buckley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, William H. Shin and Michael Katz, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
**********
Defendant and appellant David Martin Griffin appeals from the trial court’s order extending his commitment as a mentally disordered offender (MDO) pursuant to Penal Code section 2970. Defendant contends reversal is warranted because the trial court failed to properly advise him of his right to a jury trial at the recommitment hearing and the record does not otherwise affirmatively show he made a knowing and voluntary waiver of that right. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Defendant was convicted of stalking and sentenced to prison (Pen. Code, § 646.9, subd. (a)). After his release, defendant violated parole by engaging in stalking behavior again. In 2002, defendant was admitted to the Department of State Hospitals as an MDO. His commitment has been repeatedly renewed since then. Some of the recommitment proceedings were jury trials. Several times defendant waived his right to a jury trial and proceeded with a court trial. He is presently a patient at Coalinga State Hospital with a primary diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type. On January 28, 2021, the People filed a petition to extend defendant’s commitment for another year. At a pretrial hearing on May 18, 2021, defense counsel advised the court that she and defendant spoke the previous day and that defendant wanted to waive his right to a jury trial and have the petition set for a court trial. Thereafter, the court twice asked defendant if he wanted to give up his right to have a jury trial and to have a judge decide the petition and defendant said yes both times, adding the second time that he “plan[ned] on getting out. The doctors want me out of here.”
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)