People v. Mora CA2/8

California Court of Appeal May 19, 2022 No. B312126Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the defendant forfeited his claim regarding the denial of counsel of choice at his arraignment by failing to object or assert his preference for different counsel at that time.

Issues

Whether the trial court improperly denied the defendant his counsel of choice at his arraignment.
Whether the defendant's failure to object to appointed counsel at his arraignment constituted a forfeiture of his claim.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Mora forfeited this claim. He had counsel at his arraignment. If he wanted other counsel to represent him, he had to say so then.”

“Mora told the judge nothing about an attorney. He instead remained silent and permitted the public defender to speak for him. This inaction forfeited Mora’s claim.”

Filed 5/19/22 P. v. Mora CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B312126

Plaintiff and Respondent, Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. MA075234 v.

MYTCHELL MORA,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Lisa Mangay Chung, Judge. Affirmed. Richard B. Lennon, 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, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, and Michael J. Wise, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

____________________ Mytchell Mora seeks reversal of a judgment arising from his no contest plea. He contends the trial court improperly deprived him of his attorney of choice at his arraignment. Mora accepted appointed counsel at the arraignment and did not challenge this arrangement until afterwards. We affirm. Police arrested Mora on December 5, 2018. Mora allegedly had threatened the lives of a police sergeant and the sergeant’s family. A complaint charged him with three counts of stalking and 14 counts of making criminal threats. Mora’s arraignment was the day after his arrest. It was quick: Mora appeared with a deputy public defender who announced his appearance “for Mr. Mora.” Counsel then waived “formal reading and advisal” and entered a not guilty plea and denials. Mora raised no objection and in fact said nothing. The trial court noted Mora’s probation would remain revoked, set a joint probation violation hearing and preliminary hearing, and concluded the session. (Later-appointed counsel explained Mora was on probation in another case for the identical offense against the identical victims.) Mora then did several about-faces. A minute order shows a private attorney substituted in the case roughly two weeks after the arraignment. Soon after, Mora sought to represent himself, and the court granted his request in late January 2019. Mora filed numerous motions on his own behalf in the ensuing months. Midway during the May 2019 preliminary hearing, Mora asked for a public defender. The court appointed counsel, who finished the hearing. This counsel eventually sought to be

People v. Mora CA2/8

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B312126

MYTCHELL MORA,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

WILEY, J.

AI Brief