Benjamin Adams v. Midge Carroll, Warden

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a defendant’s request to represent himself was not equivocal even though he stated that he would do so only as a last resort to avoid being represented by a particular appointed attorney
• noting that a defendant’s choice was unequivocal because he “took one position and stuck to it”
• noting that “occasional musings on the benefits of self-representation” do not invoke the right to self-representation
• concluding that, because defendants normally give up more than they gain when electing self-representation, courts must be reasonably certain a defendant actually wishes to self-represent; a defendant who equivocates “is presumed to have requested the assistance of counsel”
• concluding the request was unequivocal
• defendant’s request to proceed pro se unequivocal when he persisted in choosing to represent himself rather than rely on counsel whom he mistrusted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).