People v. Ruffin
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted of corporal injury to a cohabitant and assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury. Defendant had exercised his right to represent himself pursuant to Faretta v. California. The trial court found the strike and prior prison term allegations true, struck one strike at sentencing, and sentenced defendant to eight years in prison. The Court of Appeal held that defendant's Faretta waiver was invalid, because the master calendar court's inquiry about the Faretta form and the remainder of the record failed to adequately demonstrate that defendant understood the dangers and disadvantages of representing himself consistent with established case authority. In this case, the trial court failed to ascertain on the record whether defendant read and understood the written Faretta form and failed to inquire about ambiguities in defendants' responses regarding his understanding of the nature of the charges against him. Furthermore, nothing in the record advised defendant of the penal consequences of conviction.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.