(1)Where a defendant refused to attend his trial on rape charges, choosing to stay in a holding cell, the trial court could rely on the defense counsel’s statements and was not required to use force to compel him to attend or to delay the trial, and the court was also not required to enter a holding cell in the presence of other prisoners to make a record of the defendant’s waiver, and the court did not err in finding that the waiver was valid based on the attorney’s representations and the defendant’s statement at the penalty phase that he had decided not to attend the trial.
(2)Where a defendant argued that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a continuance to conduct a psychological examination, counsel’s mere assertion that the defendant was incompetent did not give the court reasonable cause to believe that an examination was needed, and the record showed that the defendant had sufficient ability to consult with his attorneys and that he reasonably understood them, so the court did not err in denying the request.
Judgment is affirmed.
State v. Bracken (MLW No. 64164/Case No. ED97069 – 12 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Quigless, J.) Appealed from circuit court, St. Louis City, Hettenbach, J. (Gilbert Chester Sison for appellant) (Timothy A. Blackwell for respondent).