Volume 117 — Washington Reports, Second Series

<bold>[1] Criminal Law — Right to Counsel — Right To Proceed Pro Se —</bold> <bold>Waiver — In General.</bold> Under the Sixth Amendment, criminal defendants have the right to waive assistance of counsel and to represent themselves at trial. <bold>[2] Criminal Law — Right to Counsel — Counsel of Choice —</bold> <bold>Scope.</bold> A criminal defendant's right to representation by counsel of choice is limited in the interests of fairness and efficient judicial administration.<page_number>Page 370</page_number> <bold>[3] Criminal Law — Right to Counsel — Right To Proceed Pro Se —</bold> <bold>Scope.</bold> A criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment right to proceed pro se does not include the right to choose any advocate if the defendant wishes to be represented. <bold>[4] Criminal Law — Right to Counsel — Indigent Defendant —</bold> <bold>Dissatisfaction With Appointed Counsel — In General.</bold> Whether an indigent defendant's dissatisfaction with court-appointed counsel is meritorious and justifies the appointment of new counsel lies within the trial court's discretion. <bold>[5] Criminal Law — Right to Counsel — Indigent Defendant —</bold> <bold>Dissatisfaction With Appointed Counsel — Election — Effect.</bold> If, after counsel has been appointed for an indigent defendant, the defendant seeks assignment of substitute counsel but fails to provide the court with adequate reasons for the substitution, the court may require the defendant to elect whether to continue with appointed counsel or to proceed pro se. The defendant's election to proceed pro se under these circumstances does not violate the defendant's right to counsel and may constitute a waiver of the right. <bold>[6] Criminal Law — Right to Counsel — Indigent Defendant —</bold> <bold>Dissatisfaction With Appointed Counsel — Waiver — Validity.</bold> After a trial court has rejected a criminal defendant's unjustified request for substitute court-appointed counsel, and the court has given the defendant a choice between continuing with current counsel or proceeding pro se, the defendant's choice to proceed pro se must be stated unequivocally, <italic>i.e.</italic>, the defendant must make a knowing and intelligent waiver of the right to counsel. The waiver must also be timely. <bold>[7] Criminal Law — Right to Counsel — Waiver — Validity —</bold> <bold>Knowledge of Risks and Effects — Determination.</bold> A criminal defendant who chooses to proceed pro se has knowingly and intelligently waived the Sixth Amendment right to counsel if the record reflects, prior to making the choice, that the defendant understood the seriousness of the charge, the maximum penalty that could be imposed, and that technical procedural rules exist that may govern the conduct of the trial. <bold>[8] Criminal Law — Right to Counsel — Standby Counsel — Right of</bold> <bold>Defendant.</bold> Pro se defendants have no absolute right to standby counsel. <bold>[9] Criminal Law — Right to Counsel — Right To Act as Cocounsel</bold> <bold>— In General.</bold> There is no Sixth Amendment right to "hybrid representation" whereby criminal defendants serve as cocounsel with their attorneys.<page_number>Page 371</page_number> <bold>[10] Criminal Law — Right to Counsel — Manipulation To Delay and</bold> <bold>Disrupt Trial.</bold> A criminal defendant may not manipulate the Sixth Amendment right to counsel for the purpose of delaying and disrupting trial. <bold>[11] Criminal Law — Right to Counsel — Waiver — Effect.</bold> A criminal defendant who chooses to proceed without the assistance of counsel is not entitled to special consideration, and the inadequacy of the defense cannot provide a basis for a new trial or an appeal. <bold>[12] Criminal Law — Trial — Presence of Defendant — Removal — In</bold> <bold>General.</bold> In order to maintain the dignity and decorum of the courtroom and to maintain orderly and fair proceedings, trial courts have discretion to remove criminal defendants from the courtroom. <bold>[13] Criminal Law — Trial — Presence of Defendant — Right To Be</bold> <bold>Present — Limitations.</bold> A criminal defendant's right to be present at trial is not absolute; the right is subject either to the defendant's removal from the courtroom due to disruptive behavior or the defendant's voluntary absence from the proceedings.