United States v. John Paul Wilson

666 F.2d 1241 9 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1500 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John Paul WILSON, Defendant-Appellant. No. 81-1117. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Sept. 9, 1981. Decided Feb. 1, 1982. 1 John Paul Wilson, in pro per. 2 Ruth L. Cohen, Asst. U. S. Atty., Las Vegas, Nev., for plaintiff-appellee. 3 Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada. 4 Before WRIGHT and FLETCHER, Circuit Judges, and EAST, * District Judge. EAST, District Judge: THE APPEAL 5 Wilson, appearing pro se, and in forma pauperis, appeals from a judgment of conviction and sentence for escape under 18 U.S.C. § 751 (a). 1 We note jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. THE FACTS 6 On December 17, 1979, Wilson pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor counterfeit charge, 18 U.S.C. § 491 (a). He received a one year sentence with six months suspended on the condition that he spend six months in a treatment-oriented institution, and was placed on three years probation. 7 After some delay due to another pending proceedings, Wilson was taken to the West Glenn Center, a federal halfway house. About two weeks after his arrival at…

THE APPEAL

Wilson, appearing pro se, and in forma pauperis, appeals from a judgment of conviction and sentence for escape under 18 U.S.C. § 751 (a). 1 We note jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

THE FACTS

On December 17, 1979, Wilson pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor counterfeit charge, 18 U.S.C. § 491 (a). He received a one year sentence with six months suspended on the condition that he spend six months in a treatment-oriented institution, and was placed on three years probation.

After some delay due to another pending proceedings, Wilson was taken to the West Glenn Center, a federal halfway house. About two weeks after his arrival at the facility, Wilson signed out and failed to return. Deputy United States Marshals staked out Wilson’s girl friend’s apartment in Arizona. The marshals, in possession of both a description and a photograph of Wilson, observed him leave the apartment, stopped him, and explained who they were and who they were looking for. Although one marshal testified that he was certain at that point that the suspect was in fact Wilson, they neither informed Wilson that *1244 he was under arrest, nor read him the warnings required by Miranda…

dissenting:

Because the majority misconstrues Wilson’s self-representation claim and erroneously concludes that he was not denied his right to self-representation, I must dissent.

Wilson wanted to represent himself; he said so unequivocally at his arraignment. Instead, after a hearing, the magistrate appointed counsel to represent Wilson because “the defendant lacks sufficient background educationally or otherwise to adequately represent himself...” Wilson protested but received no response. 1 On the day of his trial, with potential jurors already in the *1250 courtroom, the judge offered Wilson the choice of conducting his own trial or proceeding with counsel, but with an opportunity to question witnesses himself. Wilson chose to proceed with counsel because he had not had an opportunity to prepare his own defense.

The sixth amendment and 28 U.S.C. § 1654 (1976) guarantee a defendant the right to represent himself in federal court. Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 813, 818 , 95 S.Ct. 2525, 2530, 2532 , 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975); Bittaker v. Enomoto, 587 F.2d 400, 402 (9th Cir. 1978). This right cannot be denied because a defendant lacks expertise or professional capabilities,…