Benjamin Adams v. Midge Carroll, Warden

Bad Law
875 F.2d 1441·1989 WL 55743·1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 7539
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 30, 198988-5631California2,339 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kozinski, J.

A criminal defendant’s assertion of his sixth amendment right to self-representation must be knowing and intelligent, Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 835 , 95 S.Ct. 2525, 2541 , 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975), timely and not for the purpose of delay, United States v. Smith, 780 F.2d 810, 811 (9th Cir.1986) (per curiam), and unequivocal, Armant v. Marquez, 772 F.2d 552, 555 (9th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1099 , 106 S.Ct. 1502 , 89 L.Ed.2d 902 (1986). This case presents a question concerning the last of these requirements: Is a request to proceed without counsel unequivocal where the defendant consistently wishes to invoke the right only as an alternative to the appointment of a particular defense attorney? We hold that it is.

I

On June 28, 1983, Benjamin Adams was charged with robbery, attempted robbery and kidnapping for the purpose of robbery. Los Angeles County Deputy Public Defender Dennis Carroll was appointed to represent Adams, who pleaded not guilty.

The relationship between Adams and Carroll deteriorated quickly. On September 14, citing a “lack of trust and communication with Mr. Carroll,” and accusing Carroll of incompetent representation at his preliminary…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.