People v. Oglesby

• Decision Date: 07 January 2008
• Docket Number: No. G037796.,G037796.
• Citation: 158 Cal.App.4th 818,70 Cal.Rptr.3d 443
• Court: California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
• Parties: The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Rodney Lyn OGLESBY, Defendant and Appellant.

70 Cal.Rptr.3d 443

158 Cal.App.4th 818

The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Rodney Lyn OGLESBY, Defendant and Appellant.

No. G037796.

Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 3.

January 7, 2008.

Phillip I. Bronson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, Encino, for Defendant and Appellant.

Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, Peter Quon, Jr., and Maxine Cutler, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

OPINION

O'LEARY, J.

Rodney Lyn Oglesby pled guilty to (1) committing domestic violence with corporal injury, resulting in a traumatic condition, (2) aggravated assault, and (3) committing animal cruelty by killing a kitten. He also admitted he inflicted great bodily injury on the victim and he had served three prison terms for which he had not remained free of prison custody for a period of five years.

Pursuant to a plea bargain, the trial court sentenced Oglesby to a total prison term of six years. Approximately two weeks later, Oglesby filed a notice of appeal, but the trial court denied his request for a certificate of probable cause. Oglesby then filed an amended notice of appeal claiming to challenge the validity of the sentencing procedure. Specifically, he as serfs the trial court failed to sua sponte hold a second mental competency hearing before sentencing. The Attorney Genera) argues Oglesby's failure to obtain a certificate of probable cause bars consideration of this issue on appeal. We conclude both parties are wrong, and the judgment must be affirmed.

I

Oglesby and Karen Corbin had been living together for five months before he attacked her. It all began in early October, when Corbin brought home a kitten injured after being hit by a car. Toe kitten walked with a limp and "once in a while" would hiss at Oglesby. Approximately one week later, Oglesby told Corbin on the telephone he had shaken and killed the cat. Later that day, he told her the dead kitten and its belongings were in a dumpster.

The next morning, October 20, 200(i, Corbin recalled Oglesby was angry and "tore up the room." Together they left the motel room where they were staying and Corbin tried several times to leave Oglesby because she was frightened of him. However, he was able to restrain her by holding her hand, and he waited for her outside the restroom so that she could not slip away.

When they returned to the motel, Corbin pleaded with the manager to call the police or let her come inside the office. He refused, and Corbin tried to resist returning to the room by sitting on the ground. Oglesby proceeded to kick and punch her shoulders, head, and face. He tried to drag her across the parking lot by grabbing her hair.

The Anaheim Police Department received two 911 emergency calls at 11:30 a.m. One caller stated a woman was being beaten up by her husband in the motel parking lot, and "[s]he's already got a bloody face." The caller identified the "husband" as being in his 40's, with long blond hair, wearing a black shirt and a baseball cap, and named "Rodney." The second caller also reported a man beating "the shit outta his wife" at the motel, "right in front of the office."

Oglesby stopped beating Corbin when a resident of the motel intervened. She was bleeding from her nose, mouth, and face. Oglesby had pulled out a lot of her hair when he tried to drag her away. During an initial examination at the West Anaheim Medical Center, Corbin reported she had no feeling in her left cheek and had a continuously bloody nose. At the preliminary hearing. Corbin testified she was still experiencing these problems.

Fn the beginning of the criminal proceedings, Oglesby had a succession of differed defers-c counsel appointed to represent him. Initially, he was represented by Public Defender Matthew Darling for his arraignment and preliminary hearing. Public Defender Mark Brown represented him at the next hearing where he pled not guilty to all the counts. At a few pretrial hearings, Oglesby was represented by Public Defender Scott Belasco. But, after a few weeks, the public defender declared a conflict and in December 2005, the court appointed Alternate Public Defender, Randy Lndisky.

Upon Ladisky's request, the court appointed a psychiatrist, Ted Greenzang, to examine Oglesby's mental competency to stand trial. At the request of the People, the court also appointed psychiatrist Kaushal Sharma to examine Oglesby. The court directed the doctors to determine from their examination: "(1) The nature of [Oglesby's] mental disorder, if any[;] [¶] (2) [Oglesby's] ability or inability to understand the nature of the criminal proceedings or assist counsel with a defense[;] [¶] (3) Whether treatment with antipsychotic medication is medically appropriate] [H] (4) Whether such medication is likely to restore [Oglesby] to mental competence[;] [¶] (5) Whether [Oglesby] has the capacity to make decisions regarding antipsychotic medication[;] [¶] (6) Whether [Oglesby] is a danger to self or others[;] [¶] (7) The likely or potential side effects of the medication[;] [¶] (8) Its expected efficacy[;] and [¶] (9) Possible alternative treatments[.]"

A few months later, the court considered Sharma's and Greenzang's reports. The minute order reflects the People and the defense waived their right to a hearing, waived the presence of the two doctors, and submitted the issue of mental competency on the report of Sharma only. The court concluded Oglesby was not mentally incompetent under Penal Code section 1368, and it ordered criminal proceedings reinstated.

Before trial, Oglesby filed a motion to relieve his appointed counsel pursuant to People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118, 84 Cal.Rptr. 156, 465 P.2d 44 (Marsden). On October 6, 2006, the court held a Marsden hearing and denied the motion.

Over the next few weeks, the court made several evidentiary rulings. First, it determined the 911 calls were admissible. Next, it granted the People's motion to introduce Corbin's preliminary hearing testimony because she could not be located for trial. Oglesby then renewed his request for a new attorney. The court denied his request after holding another Marsden hearing.

Ladisky then informed the court that Oglesby had decided to plead guilty because "he feels helpless that his lawyer is not adequately representing him, not because he thinks he's guilty or for any other reason. And that, I think, is a travesty of justice that I cannot endorse." The court asked Oglesby directly, "How do you want to proceed today? It's completely up to you. If you want to move on with your trial, we can do that. If you want to take the court's offer, you can do that.... You could take the [People's] offer." Oglesby replied, "If I continue with the trial, can I have another lawyer?" The court advised Oglesby this was not possible, and Oglesby said he wanted to be sentenced. When the court asked him why he wanted to plead guilty, Oglesby responded, "Because I feel like it's a conflict of interest between me and my attorney. I feel like I cannot trust my attorney. I feel like if I continue in this case with my attorney, that there may be some more surprises come up [sic] and I just ... don't think I can bear with that any longer, sir."

The court told Oglesby his maximum exposure was 12 years and 8 months in prison. It informed Oglesby that in exchange for his guilty plea the court would offer him five years with two strikes and the People had offered six years with one strike. He also discussed the impact of having prior convictions as "strikes."

Oglesby accepted the People's offer and filled out a change of plea form. Ladisky would not join in the plea or the waivers and he drew lines through the preprinted paragraphs that would have indicated he had discussed the rights, charges and consequences of the plea on the form to his client. The court, prior to accepting Oglesby's plea, advised him as to his rights.

At the end of the hearing, Ladisky asked if he could make a few statements on the record. He stated, "I do not join in the pleas, waivers, or the admonitions on the priors. I don't join in anything with respect to this plea. [¶] I do feel that ... Oglesby is pleading guilty not, in fact, because he is guilty, but because he is unsatisfied and feels helpless with his lawyer."

Ladisky then added, "The defense counsel had ... Oglesby seen by a number of psychiatrists and a psychologist. [He] has a significant and severe organic impairment in his brain that affects memory, reasoning, logic, problem solving, emotional control, processing information, reasoning, confusion, and inability to adequately process the interpretation of information. [¶] I don't believe that [he] understands the nature of what he is doing. I don't believe that what he's doing is in his best interests. I don't believe he understands the consequences of his plea. As many times as I have tried to explain to him the consequences of having the strike, I am not satisfied that he understands any of that. And for those reasons, I am not joining in the [pleas] or the waivers or the admission."

In an effort to clarify the record, Ladisky noted that of the two court appointed psychiatrists, one found Oglesby competent and one did not. He explained, "we had made a tactical decision at the time to submit on the report that found him competent, because we felt that ... Oglesby needed to proceed back to trial." The court replied, "The record should also reflect that we spent the last two days going over legal 402 issues. Not once was there any reference to any mental health issue or [a section] 1368 issue. Bringing that up now doesn't cause the court any concern, because that's what was in the history of the case. But to now suggest that he's 1368 and he can't join in on the plea, I took valid waivers. The court does believe that the defendant understood the rights that the court gave him,...