decision before going ahead with further proceedings the court had to do was i think yes i can appoint you counsel but this is what it will be you have to put their choice to one more time and i don't think it was a formal role is the right to counsel a presumption can be made that he would have said no  claiming that the court should have given him a bar association return i know what the courts have already discussed this with him and now he's filed a written motion and he's not asking for the appointment of the public defender  association you're saying oh now the judge has to interpret this as a public defender that he's making motions maybe maybe this is really putting the judge in a position that the judge should not i don't think there's anything un don't think the issues could have been taken out separately and when the friend did fire the emotion then six thirty nine the motion to withdraw six thirty nine who was then appointed counsel to which she was entitled and due to the package deal in the amended motion which did address both the six being that the answer to that inquiry inches on what happened what happened on december fifth which was whether judge allen andersen abused his discretion when he denied defendants motions for your point of proposition that whether or not the defendant is using his revocation of his waiver of counsel as a weapon to thwart the administration just as he did on the remember twenty eight that he had a legal conflict with the public defender's office and as to what the hard work has been if you if your honour's to look at the transcript from the want her may have nobody else for you you're going alone now at that point there would have been necessarily a delay in this case indefinitely yes i agree that defendant does have a constitutional it's indisputable that defendant has a constitutional right to judge at that point was speaking to the defendant's attempts to get into the conversations he had in d h did with miss watts i don't have the ability to listen to what you're seeing happening behind the scenes and i can't  as council recognizes on appeal does not have a right to choose his own public defender the jury should not be allowed to tell or i'm sorry his assistant public defender the judge can call the public defender and assign an assistant i have never not representing me she's forcing me to go in please and i don't feel that it's proper that i mean is it improper for for him not to be represented by somebody he doesn't trust and she doesn't i can't imagine she would burn  his right he had the right to choose whether to take the plea or not right but then he says yes i understand what you're saying and though i had time to think about it in the just like christianity may have time to think about it but this case except for trial are given more time to essentially no not explicitly but they did discuss the public defender's office because defendant said that after hearing i'm obligated to just go along with the public defender with a public defender i go in with whatever she said i don't feel i could go to trial with her and can call a public defender in and say you have a lot of public defenders in your office do you have any body else they can represent this individual honestly if that were the case and we were to if that were to be the bright line rule every time something like this happens which happens is at a disadvantage at the forum when it mohnish minutes he was with her and that he would be at a disadvantage if everybody who was at a disadvantage then declares that they have suffered a manifest injustice because they have to represent themselves on two felonies that we get rid