Ottley

MEMORANDUM **

Montez Salamasina Ottley appeals her jury-trial convictions on fourteen counts, and her 323-month sentence, arising from her participation in a fraudulent investment scheme. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse and remand for a new trial.

Ottley contends that the district court violated her Sixth Amendment rights under Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 , 95 S.Ct. 2525 , 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975), by appointing counsel to represent her at trial, despite her wish to represent herself. We agree. Although the district court may have had Ottley’s best interests in mind, the record demonstrates that the district court relied on an improper reason for denying Ottley the right to represent herself. See United States v. Arlt, 41 F.3d 516, 518 (9th Cir.1994) (“[T]he Supreme Court’s decision in Godinez [v. Moran, 509 U.S. 389 , 113 S.Ct. 2680 , 125 L.Ed.2d 321 (1993)] explicitly forbids any attempt to measure a defendant’s competency to waive the right to counsel by evaluating [her] ability to represent [herself].”). Because the district court found Ottley competent to waive her right to counsel and the record shows that Ottley unequivocally stated her…