| Venue: | SCOTUS |
| Facts: | Charged with grand theft. Wants to represent himself. |
| Posture: | At a preliminary hearing, the judge quizzes him about tricky legal stuff, and decides not to accept his waiver of right to counsel. And so then he gets convicted. CA Ct. App. affirms, CA SC denies review. |
| Issue: | Can a defendant decline to have counsel, or can the state force a lawyer upon you? |
| Holding: | Reversed. |
| Rule: | You can appear pro se if you want. |
| Reasoning: | The right to counsel implies the right to refuse counsel. If the waiver is knowing and intelligent, there's nothing wrong with it. |
| Dicta: | Personal liberties are not rooted in the law of averages.
Berger, dissenting: the trial court should have the discretion to reject waivers of counsel in the interest of a fair trial. Blackmun, dissenting: constitutionalizing the right to self-representation is going to lead to confusion without advancing any strategic interest of the defendant. An unjust result injures society, and pro se pleading won't help that; but a just result will satisfy everybody. |