US Supreme Court Case Analysis

Decent Essays
The U.S. Supreme Court declared that a person has the right to represent himself or herself at a criminal trial based on case law from Faretta v. California (Cabell, 2012). Many people have a preset notion that those who wish to represent themselves are mentally ill, obtuse, believe they can “beat” the system, or simply are arrogant (Cabell, 2012). I do believe in certain jurisdictions it would be an advantage to conduct a defense pro se. One reason for this would be the fact that some jurisdictions have severe staffing issues with their public defenders office, which are also extremely burdened with a heavy work assignment (Cabell, 2012). In some of these cases, a defendant can possibly provide themselves a better defense than a court appointed attorney (Cabell, 2012). In some cases, the accused simply lose the trust of their council and the U.S. Supreme Court has stipulated that a defendant can always have control over the course of their trial (Cabell, 2012). Also, current data shows that people who choose a defense pro se, often have similar outcomes as…show more content…
An example of this was the case of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who was famously known as the “Underwear Bomber” (Cabell, 2012). In the end he plead guilty to violating U.S. law, but acknowledge to the court that under Islamic law, he was not guilty (Cabell, 2012). Finally, many courts allow a person who wishes to defend their self to be appointed what’s called a standby counsel (Cabell, 2012). This allows a defendant who has little to no knowledge of courtroom procedures to have a professional assist with specific procedures (Cabell, 2012). References: Cabell, K. (2012). CALCULATING AN ALTERNATIVE ROUTE: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A BLINDFOLDED RIDE AND A ROAD MAP IN PRO SE CRIMINAL DEFENSE. Law & Psychology Review,
Get Access