United States v. Charles Wesley Arlt, Cross-Appellee

Bad Law
41 F.3d 516·94 Daily Journal DAR 16927·1994 WL 668234·1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 33647·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9103
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 1, 199492-50467, 92-50517California4,830 words

Opinion

Opinion

Reinhardt, J.

BACKGROUND

Charley Wesley Arlt was convicted of conspiring to manufacture methamphetamine and money laundering. He appeals his conviction on various grounds. Here we address only Arlt’s self-representation claim. In a memorandum disposition accompanying this opinion, we deal with Arlt’s other claims, as well as those of his codefendants.

During a pretrial hearing, Arlt requested that he be permitted to represent himself at trial. After the district judge extensively discussed the disadvantages of self-representation, Arlt repeated his request. Before ruling on the motion, the district judge required Arlt to consult with a court-appointed attorney. After the consultation, Arlt again stated that he wished to proceed pro se. Despite the clarity and persistence with which Arlt made his request, the district judge denied Arlt’s motion on the ground that a poorly formulated petition filed by Arlt indicated that he was not competent to represent himself. Over Arlt’s objection, the judge then appointed an attorney to represent him.

Even after the judge appointed counsel, Arlt renewed his request. Indeed, Arlt stated that he was demanding to represent himself. The judge brushed aside…

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.