Uninvited Assistance

MEMORANDUM

To: Boss

From: Underling

Date: Recently

Re: Uninvited assistance from a law school professor

Issue: Whether, under the Sixth Amendment, which guarantees right to counsel that can only be waived by a competent (knowing and intelligent) defendant, was the defendants right to counsel violated when a party external to the proceedings offered interjections and suggestions to the defendants attorney during the course of the trial.

Rule: A competent pro se defendant had the right to choose to represent himself, without interference from court appointed standby counsel. When the defendant chooses assistance from standby counsel, the defendant is not simply allowed to pick and choose representation a la carte for whatever issue arises, but is required to accept counsel representation in totality of the case, albeit under the general guidance of the pro se defendant. Also, if qualified private counsel is chosen, the courts denial of permission for the lawyer to conduct the defense is automatically reversible error.

Analysis: Here, a law school professor is interfering with a barred attorney’s representation of the attorney’s client. This may be compared and contrasted with the right of a pro-se defendant to be free from interference in two ways.

First; if the pro-se defendant is competent, and has specifically rejected assistance from stand-by counsel, then interference of the stand-by counsel should not be tolerated. Here, the defendant is represented by counsel, and it is counsel that is being offered advice by the law professor. This does not appear to be a sixth amendment violation for the professor to provide his opinion, as that opinion is not binding on the defendant, as would be actions of stand-by counsel. However, general disruptions in the courtroom are not generally tolerated, and this does not appear to be a reasonable exception to that rule.

Second; if the pro-se defendant has utilized stand-by counsel, that defendant has...