In an opinion last week, the court of appeals helpfully summarized the law about how a defendant may lose the right to counsel, and may have recognized a new way that a defendant may lose that right. The case is State v. Blakeney, and this post explores it briefly. Background. In 2011, the defendant was arrested and charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm. He was subsequently charged with being a habitual felon. He signed a waiver of appointed counsel, and hired a lawyer to represent him. The case was continued several times on the State’s motion, and the defendant failed to appear for trial once. The matter was eventually set for trial in 2014. Two days before trial, the defendant’s attorney moved to withdraw, principally because the defendant no longer wanted to be represented by him. The defendant confirmed that he wished to discharge his attorney and indicated that he intended to hire a different lawyer. The judge permitted the withdrawal, but apparently viewed the defendant’s decision to fire his lawyer as a delaying tactic. The judge stated that the “trial is still going” and that no continuance would be allowed. The judge did not specifically advise the defendant that the defendant would be required to represent himself if he were unable to secure another attorney. When the case was called for trial, the defendant had failed to retain a new lawyer. The judge indicated that the case would proceed, notwithstanding the defendant’s reservations about being “tried [...]
Faculty Coordinators
