Posted on 07/04/2006 8:58:00 AM PDT by SmithL
MARTINEZ - Five minutes after a jury convicted Susan Polk of second-degree murder June 16, the Orinda housewife who had spent three months representing herself in court requested an attorney.
Polk, now facing up to 16 years to life in prison, is set to appear Thursday for a pre-sentencing hearing with a court-appointed lawyer. She requested an attorney to help draft motions before her July 14 sentencing.
Legal experts say Polk's courtroom experience demonstrates why judges should order more psychological tests before allowing defendants to represent themselves.
"At least you should have somebody look into it and decide whether (the defendant) has a rational understanding of what's going on and who makes decisions not based on paranoia or other psychological problems they might have," said Ken Murray, mental health chairman of the National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that defendants need only a basic understanding of the charges against them and the proceedings going on around them in other to act as their own attorney.
The high court decided in 1975 that a Los Angeles Superior Court judge erred by forcing grand theft suspect Anthony Faretta to be represented by an attorney. The high court's opinion set the standard of self-representations at a basic level, saying a defendant has the constitutional right to self-representation when he or she "voluntarily and intelligently elects to do so."
The defendant, the opinion says, "was literate, competent, and understanding, and that he was voluntarily exercising his informed free will."
On most days of her trial, Polk accused the judge and prosecutor of misconduct, sometimes prompting the judge to stop proceedings and excuse the jury. While most noncapital murder trials last two to four weeks, Polk's went on for three months.
Many witnesses who testified against her called her delusional. She told the jury she had psychic powers, predicted international events and believed her husband and some of his friends were spies.
One judge in May 2005 ordered Polk to undergo a psychological evaluation to make sure she was competent to stand trial, court documents say. She refused to cooperate with the doctor. One month later, a second judge authorized her to represent herself.
Polk cross-examined some witnesses for days, often because she was unsuccessful in trying to enter evidence of documents or statements. The prosecutor often objected to questions she asked the witnesses. If the judge sustained the objections, Polk would try to ask the same question in a different way. When she wasn't able to get an answer she wanted from the witness, the jury saw her temper erupt as she accused the judge and prosecutor of working together to convict her.
A defendant's lack of experience can overturn a case on appeal, said David LaBahn, executive director of the California District Attorney Association.
Appellate courts can blame the prosecutor for taking advantage of a defendant who was unaware the prosecutor entered evidence that an experienced defense lawyer would have argued against, he said.
But judges have no ability to stop a defendant based on their legal experience, LaBahn said. They are responsible for demanding psychological tests until they are satisfied the trial will proceed in a professional manner.
"If it's a free-for-all, that's really up to the court," he said.
Santa Clara University School of Law professor Gerald Uelmen said the high court's standard doesn't give judges enough flexibility to force a defendant to have an attorney.
"I'm really torn," Uelmen said. "We shouldn't place an attorney on them if they don't want one. But most often (defendants) most desiring to represent themselves are the least competent to do so."
Judges can continue to order psychological examinations, but the mental standard still is too low, said Contra Costa District Attorney Bob Kochly. Defendants who understand the court proceedings but exhibit mental problems will be able to represent themselves until the U.S. Supreme Court makes a change.
Kochly characterized Polk as more successful presenting evidence and other legal strategies than most defendant's who represent themselves, even some attorneys.
"We saw that people who are competent to stand trial but have some emotional issues ... things get out of hand," Kochly said. "Until (the justices) re-examine that issue, there's very little that can be done."
I wonder if Horowitz is available?
Is Horowitz the defense lawyer whose wife was murdered recently? If so,of course he's available! After all,if Dukakis can take the position that any guy who were to murder *his* wife shouldn't get the chair,then why wouldn't Horowitz take the same attitude?
Let me guess: She going to appeal on the grounds that her lawyer was incompetent.
Especially after Polk publicly accused Horowitz of being involved in his wife's murder.
I don't think Horowitz is available to Slasher Suzie....she accused him of killing his wife.
And he may be too busy.....he has a new squeeze. One of the jurors from Polks first trial where he was her attorney.
Boy,this dude certainly got over his grief quickly.I wonder if the prosecutor who's handling his wife's murder has taken note of this fact.
Over at CTV forum I was reading stuff from her ex Berkley neighbors.
She has always been mentally ill.
Not to say she is stupid as I believe she is an intelligent woman but as her son said {Cookoo For Cocoa Puffs}
Regarding Dan Horwitz 'net rumor is he hooked up with a juror from Polks trial.
Please post that trial since you are semi local and have access to the papers.
I have tried accessing the Times but it takes forever to load.
Actually, what we need is a consensus opinion that people are responsible for decisions they make. This woman has to eventually take responsibility for her decisions, hopefully in her lifetime. Won't happen though since our culture revolves around the cult of victimology.
Posted on June 1, on this thread: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1642462/posts
And for a lot more information on this case, search on keyword SusanPolk.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.