Self-Representation & Right to Counsel (Faretta)
Rulings about the right to a lawyer, the right to go pro per/pro se, Faretta waivers, standby counsel, and who controls key decisions in a defense. Summaries from Criminal Defense Resources™ are general education for pro per/pro se defendants and families, not legal advice.
8 rulings, newest first.
McCoy v. Louisiana
The Court held that a defendant has the right to insist that his lawyer not admit guilt at trial, even when the lawyer believes admitting guilt is the best way to avoid a death sentence. Violating that choice is a "structural" error that requires a new trial without any separate showing of harm.
Indiana v. Edwards
The Court held that a state may require a lawyer for a defendant who is competent to stand trial but who, because of severe mental illness, is not competent to conduct the trial on his or her own.
United States v. Erskine
The Ninth Circuit held that a defendant's decision to give up his lawyer and represent himself was not knowing and intelligent, because the record showed he had not been correctly informed of the maximum penalty he faced. The conviction was reversed.
Martinez v. Court of Appeal of California, Fourth Appellate District
The Court held that the Faretta right to self-representation does not extend to a direct appeal. The Constitution does not require states to let a defendant represent himself on appeal from a criminal conviction.
McKaskle v. Wiggins
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.
Faretta v. California
The U.S. Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment gives a person charged with a crime the right to represent himself or herself. A state cannot force a lawyer on a defendant who knowingly and intelligently chooses to go without one.
United States v. Wade
The Court held that a post-indictment lineup is a critical stage of the prosecution at which the defendant has a right to have a lawyer present. A later in-court identification may still be allowed if the prosecution shows it has a source independent of the improper lineup.
Gideon v. Wainwright
The Court held that the right to a lawyer is a fundamental right that applies in state courts. States must provide a lawyer to people charged with felonies who cannot afford one.
Get new rulings by email
A short, free email when we add new rulings and resources. No spam. Unsubscribe any time.