Blankenship v. State
Decision Date | 18 July 1984 |
Docket Number | No. 796-83,796-83 |
Citation | 673 S.W.2d 578 |
Parties | Terry BLANKENSHIP, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Adolfo Quijano, Jr. (Court-appointed), Robin Norris, El Paso, for appellant.
Steve W. Simmons, Dist. Atty. and Allan Massis, Asst. Dist. Atty., El Paso, Robert Huttash, State's Atty., and Cathleen Riedel, Asst. State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
Before the court en banc.
OPINION ON APPELLANT'S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
"He who represents himself has a fool for a client."
While there may be resounding truth to the old proverb, today we must determine if the trial judge's jealous protection of the appellant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel demonstrated by his refusal to allow pro se representation was in error. We find that it was and reverse appellant's conviction.
Appellant was convicted by a jury of aggravated robbery and his punishment was assessed at 35 years confinement. The El Paso Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction in Blankenship v. State, 656 S.W.2d 184 (Tex.App.--El Paso 1983). We granted appellant's petition for discretionary review to consider the Court of Appeals' holding that appellant's request for pro se representation was conditional on his being provided with the appropriate law books and thus there was no error in the trial judge's refusal to permit appellant to represent himself at trial.
On December 11, 1980, appellant was indicted for aggravated robbery. On February 6, 1981, a copy of the State's Motion for Arraignment was sent to Adolfo Quijano, the appellant's attorney. 1 At the March 2, 1981, arraignment, appellant appeared with his attorney and pled not guilty. On March 30, 1981, the day of trial, the trial judge engaged in the following colloquy with the appellant:
2
The Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution guarantee that a person brought to trial in any state or federal court must be afforded the right to the assistance of counsel before he can validly be convicted and punished by imprisonment. The U.S. Supreme Court in Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 819, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 2533, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975) found in the Sixth Amendment an independent constitutional right of an accused to conduct his own defense and held that the right to self-representation does not arise from one's power to waive assistance of counsel. The Court held that it is for the accused personally to decide whether assistance of counsel in his particular case is to his advantage, and "his choice must be honored out of 'that respect for the individual which is the lifeblood of the law,' " Id. at 834, 95 S.Ct. at 2541, citing Illinois v. Allen, 397 U.S. 337, 350-351, 90 S.Ct. 1057, 1064-1065, 25 L.Ed.2d 353 (1970) (Brennan, J., concurring). (Emphasis added).
The nature of criminal litigation is complex and defendants who insist that they neither need nor want assistance in rebutting the prosecution's claim have made an unsagacious choice. It is undeniable that in most criminal prosecutions defendants could better defend with counsel's guidance than by their own unskilled efforts. But the right to defend is personal. It is the defendant, not his lawyer or the State, who will bear the personal consequences of a conviction. It is the defendant, therefore, who must be free personally to decide whether in his particular case counsel is to his advantage. While we may be skeptical of his election knowing that he may conduct his defense ultimately to his own detriment, his choice must be honored. Faretta, supra 422 U.S. at 833, 95 S.Ct. at 2540. In order to competently and intelligently choose self-representation, the defendant should be made aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation so that the record will establish that "he knows what he is doing and his choice is made with eyes open." Faretta, supra at 835, 95 S.Ct. at 2541, citing Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 58 S.Ct. 1019, 82...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Walker v. Packer
... ... Mandamus will not issue where there is "a clear and adequate remedy at law, such as a normal appeal." State v. Walker, 679 S.W.2d 484, 485 (Tex.1984). Mandamus is intended to be an extraordinary remedy, available only in limited circumstances. The writ ... ...
-
Johnson v. State
...cited in Martin, 630 S.W.2d at 954. To make this assessment, we require no litany, "no formulaic questioning[,]" Blankenship v. State, 673 S.W.2d 578, 583 (Tex.Cr.App.1984), but defendants must be "aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, so that the record will establ......
-
State v. Brown
...the standards may not be identical. See, e.g., United States v. Price, 474 F.2d 1223, 1226-27 (9th Cir.1973); Blankenship v. State, 673 S.W.2d 578 (Tex.Crim.App.1984).Some courts have suggested that the standard for evaluating requests to defend pro se should be more permissive than the sta......
-
Zani v. State
...I find that under this Court's more recent decisions, such as Martin v. State, 630 S.W.2d 952 (Tex.Cr.App.1982), and Blankenship v. State, 673 S.W.2d 578 (Tex.Cr.App.1984), the court of appeals' decision to reject appellant's complaint that the trial judge erred in refusing to permit him to......
-
Right to Counsel and Effective Assistance of Counsel
...which is being abandoned, as well as the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation. Collier, supra ; Blankenship v. State, 673 S.W.2d 578 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984). RIGHT TO COUNSEL, EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL 4-33 Rංඁඍ ඍඈ Cඈඎඇඌൾඅ ൺඇൽ Eൿൿൾർඍංඏൾ Aඌඌංඌඍൺඇർൾ ඈൿ Cඈඎඇඌൾඅ §4:74 The deci......
-
Right to Counsel and Effective Assistance of Counsel
...which is being abandoned, as well as the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation. Collier, supra ; Blankenship v. State, 673 S.W.2d 578 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984). The decision is made voluntarily if it is uncoerced. Collier. No formulaic questioning is required to establish a knowing ......
-
Right to Counsel and Effective Assistance of Counsel
...counsel, which is being abandoned, as well as the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation. Collier, supra; Blankenship v. State, 673 S.W.2d 578 Crim. App. 1984). The decision is made voluntarily if it is uncoerced. Collier. No formulaic questioning is required to establish a knowin......
-
Right to Counsel and Effective Assistance of Counsel
...which is being abandoned, as well as the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation. Collier, supra ; Blankenship v. State, 673 S.W.2d 578 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984). The decision is made voluntarily if it is uncoerced. Collier. No formulaic questioning is required to establish a knowing ......