7thriv

Kurt F. Johnson of Sunnyvale and Dale Heineman of Union City sought to overturn their convictions by arguing that their courtroom behavior showed they were incompetent to represent themselves.

The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said the two men had filed "meaningless and nonsensical documents" during the trial, insisted on wearing prison clothing in front of the jury, and delivered "off-the-wall comments" such as Johnson's statement to jurors that they should "enter a guilty plea for us."

But the court said Johnson and Heineman had been found mentally competent in a pretrial exam. The trial judge all but implored them to accept lawyers, the court said, and the men wound up putting on a defense of sorts, making opening statements and closing arguments and questioning witnesses.

"The record clearly shows that the defendants are fools, but that is not the same as being incompetent," Judge Barry Silverman said in the 3-0 ruling.

Under Supreme Court decisions dating back to 1975, he said, "they had the right to represent themselves and go down in flames if they wished."