Can I Represent Myself?
The United States Constitution guarantees a plethora of rights to the accused in criminal trials including rights that have previously been discussed in this blog such as the right to remain silent, the right to an attorney, and the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. One right that has not been previously been discussed on this site, however, is the right not to have an attorney. That is, do criminal defendants have the right to represent themselves, also known as proceeding pro se, or can the court force them to have an attorney at trial?
The United States Supreme Court took encountered this issue head-on in Faretta v. California in 1975. In Faretta, the defendant was charged with grand theft and a public defender was appointed to represent Faretta at his arraignment. Prior to trial, Faretta (believing that he could provide himself with the best representation because the public defender had a heavy case load) requested that the public defender be removed from the case and that Faretta be allowed to represent himself. The trial judge warned Faretta that he believed him to be “making a mistake” and informed him that he would receive no special favors at trial, but the judge accepted Farretta’s waiver of counsel and allowed him to proceed pro se. A few weeks later, the judge held a hearing at which he sought to test Faretta’s knowledge of courtroom procedure and the rules of evidence. After the hearing, the judge was not convinced that Faretta was familiar enough with courtroom rules and procedure to represent himself at trial and reversed his earlier ruling, appointing an attorney for Faretta. After Faretta was convicted at trial, he appealed, arguing that he was denied his constitutional right to represent himself at trial.
The United States Supreme Court agreed with Faretta. They held that the Sixth Amendment, which applies to the States by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees that a defendant in a state criminal trial has a constitutional right of self-representation and that he or she may proceed pro se when he or she voluntarily and intelligently elects to do so. The Court held that in this case the state courts erred in forcing Faretta against his will to accept a public defender and in denying his request to conduct his own defense.
This case thus established the principle that criminal defendants may represent themselves in criminal trials if they voluntarily and intelligently elect to do so. However, persons accused of crimes should be aware of the enormous risk that accompanies this decision. Attorneys are formally trained to handle trials and ethically bound to represent criminal defendants to the best of their ability. An experienced criminal Pigeon Forge defense attorney will be able to handle even the most complex of situations that may arise at trial, whereas the defendant will have no previous experience with some situations that may occur. Thus, although criminal defendants do have a constitutional right to represent themselves, it is not always wise to do so. Future blog articles will discuss the ramifications of this decision in more detail.
Bookmark: 
