McKaskle v. Wiggins

A plain-English summary from Criminal Defense Resources™, a free resource for pro per/pro se defendants and their families.

Court

U.S. Supreme Court

Decided

January 23, 1984

Citation

465 U.S. 168 (1984)

Topics

Self-Representation & Right to Counsel (Faretta)

What did the court decide?

The Court held that a judge may appoint standby counsel for a self-represented defendant, even over the defendant's objection. But standby counsel may not take over. The defendant must keep actual control over the case presented to the jury, and the jury must still see the defendant as representing himself.

Why does it matter?

It explains what "standby" or "advisory" counsel can and cannot do. Standby counsel is common when a defendant chooses to go pro per/pro se.

Where can I read the full opinion?

Read the full opinion on Cornell Law School LII →

Always read the full opinion and check whether later cases have limited or changed it. A summary can leave out important details.

Related rulings

• McCoy v. Louisiana (U.S. Supreme Court, 2018)
• Indiana v. Edwards (U.S. Supreme Court, 2008)
• United States v. Erskine (9th Circuit, 2004)
• Martinez v. Court of Appeal of California, Fourth Appellate District (U.S. Supreme Court, 2000)