### NUM BER 13-07- 0026 0-CR 

## COURT OF A PP EA LS T H I R T E E N T H D I S T R I C T O F T E X AS CORPUS CHRI ST I - 

## E D I N B U R G
FE LIC IA NO A

VA LOS , JR ., A pp ellan t,

v. TH E STA

TE OF T EXAS, A pp ellee.
On a p p ea l f ro m th e 37 0t h D is tr ic t C o u rt of H ida lgo C ou nty , T exas . 

## ME MOR A N D U M OP I N I ON Be fo re C hie f J us tice Vald ez an d Ju stice s Y añ ez an d Be na v ide s M emo rand um Opin ion b y C hie f J us tice Vald ez Appel lan t, Fel ic ian o Av alo s, Jr ., appeal s his state- jai l felony

co nv icti on for theft. See T EX . P EN AL C OD E A NN . § 31. 0 3 (e)( 4) (A ) (V er non Su pp. 2 008)

. By tw o i ss ues, Av alo s cont ends th a t th e tri al cour t er re d by

( 1) not proper ly

admoni shi ng hi m of the dis adv antag es of sel f-represent ati on, a nd ( 2) deny ing hi s req uestfor s tandby co unsel at2

trial. Finding no factu al basis to su ppo rt Av alos’s issues, we a f f irm the trial court’s jud g ment. I. B A CKGRO UND On M ay 2, 2006, Av alo s w as ind ic ted for st eal ing a $2 ,700 pla sma- sc re en te lev is ion from a S am’s C lub st or e. Av alo s i nit ial ly retai ned L. Aron Peñ a, an att or ney , t o represent him. Atan Oct ober

16, 2006 p re -t ri al hear ing , w hic h w as atten ded by Av alo s, Peña, and the S tate, Av alo s a nnounc ed th at he w ante d t o representhi msel f. The foll ow ing d is c u s s io n t o o kp la c e b e twe e n Ava lo s , t h e t ri a l c o u rtju d ge , t h e Ho n o ra b le No e G o n za le z, Peña, and t he St ate: Av alo s: I' m presumed inn ocent

. Cou rt : No. W hat i s y our announ cement ? Y ou hav e no lawy er ? Y ou are proceed ing w it hout a l awy er ; i s t hat c or re ct? Avalos: Yes, sir , Your Honor. Court: Are y ou su re y ou want to proce ed wi tho ut a lawy er? Avalos: W ell, Your Honor— Cou rt : It is a y es or no? Avalos: Yes, sir , Your Honor. Cou rt : Al l ri g ht. Now , y ou understa nd that the cons ti tuti on all ow s y ou

y our rig ht to coun sel? Avalos: Yes, sir , Your Honor. Cou rt : And y ou chos e y our couns el. And now y ou a re ch o o sin g to

proceed w it hout y our

co unsel ; i s t hat c or re ct? Avalos: Yes, sir , Your Honor.Ear l i er i n t he h ear i ng, Av al os op i ned t hat t he Ci t y of Phar r had a “ cam pai gn” aga i nst hi m beca use 1 he l i st ened t o di ff er ent m usi c and owned hi s own h om e. 3 Cou rt : Beca use y ou had hired M r. Aron Peñ a? Avalos: Yes, sir , Your Honor. C ou rt: An d y ou n ow h av e fi r ed h i m? Avalos: Yes, Y our Hono r.

. . . . Cou rt : I real ly

do t hin k, and I 'm g oin g to sug g estto y ou, t hat y ou g et a lawy er. Av alo s: W ell , Y our H onor , l ik e I sai d— Cou rt : No. Avalos: He w ho rep resen ts himse lf is a fo ol. Court: W ell, the n y ou a re adm itting y ou a re a fool. Avalos: I'm— C ou rt: J us t l i s te n to me , pl ea s e. Th e fr us tration tha t y ou see i n my

ey es and i n my

face i s t hat I am a true b e lie ver in t he c o n s t it u t io n o f

o u r c o u n t ry. Av alo s: So am I

. Cou rt : W il l y ou sto p int er ru pti ng me. And becau se I’ m a firm bel iev er

that the c onst it uti on protec ts our r ig hts , t here i s a reason w hy w e hav e a r ig ht t o c ounse l. Y ou may thi nk that y ou are the most arti cul ate i ndi v idu al in the city of Phar r, and that y our musi c i s s uper ior , and the fact th at y ou ow n y our home mak es y ou di ff er ent t han t he pol ic e i n the ci ty of P har r, and that’ s y our t h e o ry. [1] Butlet me suggest som eth ing to y ou. Just beca use p eop le hav e an ide a tha t l awy ers a re sc oundrels , or w h a tev er

y ou w a n tt o c a l l t h e m, l a wy e rs a r e t ra i n e d

. A n d y o u g e ty o u rs e l f a g ood l awy er . An d tha t l awy ers c an prote ct y our r ig hts w it hout4 g oin g throug h a needl ess ex er ci se of w hat the DA is g oin g to do. I me an, I’m no t just pulling y our leg here. I f you go up against Mr

. O r e n d a i n [ t h e a s s i s t a n t d i s t r i c t a t t o r n e y a s s i g n e d to the cas e], y ou are g oin g up a g ain st

— Av alo s: The best , I bel iev e. Court: Let me f inish. And som eon e w ho doe sn’t interrup t me , eithe r.

Y o u a r e g o i n g u p a g a i n s ta m a n t h a ti s re s p o n s i b l e fo r t r y ing most of t he c api tal murder ca ses i n thi s C ounty , t he one w ho tr ies probabl y

the most eg re g iou s c ri mes i n thi s C ounty and has the e x per ien ce to do i t. And y ou s tand here i ndi g nant becau se y ou are c harg ed w it h a c ri me thaty ou bel iev e tha t y ou a re not guilty of , and that ’s cool. But just be cause y ou a re ind ig nant doesn’t m ake y ou s omehow or anot her a s uper adv ocat e, al l ri g ht. Av alo s: Y es, Si r. Court: I have never said this on the record. I’m going to say it. Th ere

is an o ld say ing i n Span is h: “ El q ue D ios no lo oy e - El q ue no hab la, Dios no lo oye.” Let me sug g estso methi ng to y ou. Orendai n i s not Di os. An d y ou s houl dn’ t be tal ki ng to him the w ay thaty ou are att empti ng to talk to him , beca use he is going to take ad v ant age, be cause tha t’s h is job

. His job is to ma ke sure th at he prosecu tes th ose ind iv idu als thathe b eli ev e s a re g uil ty

. And he bel iev es that y ou are g uil ty

. So y ou c an hear

the chuc kl es from the p e opl e. They are not lau g hin g bec a u se t h e y feel s or ry

for y ou, t hey

are l aug hin g beca use th e y are seein g this exercise of f utility. T hey are seei ng y ou s ay

thi ng s t hat t hat man is jus t w ri ti ng dow n l ik e he is a s ecret a ry, and he is not a s ecretar y , he is a full -fle dg ed prosec utor . So onc e ag ain , y ou hav e the abs olu te r ight to re presenty oursel f. And I’m go ing to letyo u. But myadv ic e to y ou is for y ou to g et couns el. Al l ri g ht. If y o u are diss ati sfied w ith cou nsel th at y ou hired before, t here a re plent y of lawy ers out t here tha t c an hel p y ou.5 Yo u a re se tfo r N o ve m b e r 2 0

. O k a y? Av alo s: Y our

H onor , I appreci ate y our pati ence. Cou rt : Mr

. Peña? Peñ a: For the last th ree w eeks I ha v e be en in trial. Cou rt : He di dn’ t spend that much t ime tal ki ng aboutthatbec ause I cut

h i m o ff. Peña: Boy , t hat w oul d be g ood, jud g e. Cou rt : I c ut hi m off , M r. Peña, bec ause as far as I’ m conc er ned, the

most impor

tant thi ng for me is thathe i s t e ll ing me th at he w ants to re presenthi msel f. I a m adv is ing hi m not to. Peñ a: I can sta nd b y , if y ou would like me to stand byas coun sel. Cou rt : Mr

. Peña, he doesn ’t w ant y ou as couns el. And if he w ants to

re presenthi msel f, that' s fin e . I am a dv is ing hi m to g et ot her couns el if he d oesn’ t l ik e the w ay y ou representhi m. A n d he jus t i s mak ing ce rt ain req uest s fro m the DA ’s off ic e. I am making the D A av ail abl e to him someti me thi s w eek. H e c an do w hatev er

he n eeds to do

. Peña: I th in k th a t h e h a s d ism iss e d m e . I w oul d l ik e l eav e to

wit h d ra w. Cou rt : Any obj ect ion ?

. . . . Cou rt : Oka y . Mr

. Peña, y ou are dis mis sed. Y our Mo ti on to W it hdraw

is g ra nted. Pl ease g et me an order

. Pena: I w il l, Y our H onor . Thank y ou v er y much. On Feb ruary 20, 200 7, th e case w as transf erred to an auxiliary court; th e au x iliary co u rthe ld a f in a l p re -t ria l h e a rin g, an d ca lle d th e ca se fo r tri a l. Atth e f in a l p re -t ria l h e a rin g,6

the aux il iar

y cour t jud g e, the Hon orabl e Jai me Gar z a, enter

tai ned a tr ial amendment re g ardin g the ind ic tment by the Stat e. The foll ow ing co ll oq uy then took

pl ace: Co u rt : W e u n d e rs t a n d yo u ’r e a la ym a n , o k a y. Avalos: I’m on trial fo r mylife , Your Honor. It’s going to say w het her I’m

a n h o n o r a b l e m a n o r

a t h i e f. Court: You’re rolling the dice , sir, and no t us.

Oka y . Now , I’m go ing to tel l y ou furt her and that’ s w hy

I ask ed y ou i f y ou had any

l eg al ex per ien ce. Y ou seem t o k now w hat you ’re d oin g . How ev er , y ou’ re st il l a l ay man. Y ou’ re not a lawy er are y ou? Avalos: No, sir, Y our Hono r. Cou rt : Oka y . D o y ou ev er kn ow the w ords cont empt of co urt? Avalos: Yes, sir , Your Honor. Court: All ri ght. I’m going to hold y ou to the sam e stan dard s tha t I’m

g oin g to hol d her

[t he as si sta nt di str ic t at tor ney]. Avalos: Yes, Y our Hono r. C ou rt: Yo u’ r e ex pe c te d to res pe c t th i s c ou rt an d th e j ur y . Y ou’re ex pect ed to foll ow

the Rul es of Cr imi nal Procedu re . Avalos: Yes, sir , Your Honor. Cou rt : Other

w is e y ou w il l be hel d i n c ontempt. Av alo s: Y es, si r, Y our H onor

. . . . Stat e: And, Judg e, or ig ina ll y the Defendant

w as— so the record c an re flecta hi sto ry

of the tr ial . The ar ra ig nment— I s how thatthe Defendantw as ar ra ig ned on June 19, 2006 a nd M r. Aron Pena, Sr . w as or ig ina ll y on t h e c ase. And I bel iev e tha tT her e i s not hi ng i n t he r ecor d t o sug gest t hat Peña was a cou r t - appoi nt ed a t t or ney or t hat Av al os 2 w a s f o u n d in d i g e n t b y th e tria l c o u rt s o a s to b e e l i g i b l e f o r a c o u rt-a p p o i n te d a tto rn e y . See T EX . C OD E C R IM . P ROC
. A NN . a rt. 1 .0 5 1 (c ) (V e rn o n 2 0 0 5 ) (“A n i n d i g e n t d e fe n d a n t i s e n ti tl e d to h a v e a n a tto rn e y a p p o i n te d to r epr esent hi m i n any adv er sar y j udi ci al pr oceedi ng t hat m ay r esul t i n pu ni shm ent by conf i nem ent and i n an y othe r cri m i na l proc ee di ng i f t he co urt co nc l ud es t ha t t he i nteres t s of j us t i c e req ui re rep res en t ati on . ”)

. 7 Defendantdi d not w ant M r. Pena to representhi m and, the refore, he w as allowed to w ithdra w . And t he Def end antdid not w is h oth er

co urt[- ]appoi nted couns el or to re tai n ot h er [2] coun sel. Co u rt : W e ll , m y un d e rst a n d in g is th a t t h is m o rn in g be fo re Ju d ge

Gon z alez that you ref used coun sel; is that co rrect, sir? Avalos: Yes, sir , Your Honor. C o u rt : Oka y . An d m y u n d e rs t a n d i n g fu rt h e r i s t h a th e s a i d y ou w er e—t hat h e w oul d l et y ou proceed

— Av alo s: Pro s e. Cou rt : —by

y oursel f as y ou des ire; i s t hat c or re ct? Avalos: Yes, sir , Your Honor. Court: All ri ght. W e’r e g o in g t o go ahea d—an d w e’ve g ot a jury

comi ng i n at 2:45 w hic h i s i n a few min utes

. . . . Stat e: And, Judg e, j ustfor the rec ord if the cour t can make a f ind ing tha t the Defend anthas kno w ingly , intelligently, and v olun tarily w aiv ed hi s r ig ht t o a c our t[- ]appoi nted couns el in thi s c ase. Court: T hat ’s what—I just ma de tha t f inding. I just inquired and I w ill

make t hat fin din g thaty ou w aiv ed w il li ng ly , k now ing ly and vo lu n t a ri ly— Avalos: Your Honor, — Court: —y our rig ht to coun sel, sir. Y es, sir? Av alo s: I w as w o nder ing w hy at lea st— I c oul dn’ t—t hey co uld n’tat le a s t

—wh a tI wa s sa yin g i s I wa n t e d t o r e p re s e n tm ys e lf

. I ’ve seen Defendant s i n oth e r tr ial hav e at lea st an at tor ney , y ou8 know, advi sing them on the legal mane uvers. Cou rt : Di dn’ t y ou— Av alo s: This w ay

I w on’ t be in cont empt— Court: Didn’t y ou te ll— Avalos: —of

court, Your Honor. Court: —tell Judge Gon z alez th at you did no t w antany l awy er? Didn’t

y ou or not? Avalos: Yes, sir

. Cou rt : Y ou j ustsa id y ou di d. Avalos: Yes, sir , Your Honor. Cou rt : Al l ri g ht. Av alo s: Y es, si r, I did

. Cou rt : Now , y ou’ re ch ang ing y our min d? Av alo s: No. N o, I ’l l y ou k now , Y our H onor ,— Cou rt : These are thi ng s y ou ta ke— Av alo s: —I made my bed and I ’l l li e i n i t. Cou rt : W ell , t hese a re t hin g s y ou ta ke up ear li er , s ir . An d, t he ot her

jud g e sent the cas e and he made thes e ru li ng s at y o ur re q uest

. Avalos: Yes, sir

. Cou rt : And I i nq uired ag ain and y ou ag re ed. Avalos: Yes, sir , Your Honor.A v a l o s d o e s n o t c h a l l e n g e th e “k n o w i n g l y a n d i n te l l i g e n tl y ” re q u i re m e n t. 3 9 Co u rt : O k a y. No w, we ’r e go in g t o p ic kt h e ju ry s h o rt ly. At t ri al, Av alo s ple aded not g uil ty

. The Stat e c all ed a Sam’s C lub empl oy ee and a McAl len pol ic e det ect iv e. Av alo s t est ified i n his o wn d efense, a nd c all ed hi s w ife and daug hter to tes ti fy. The j ur

y found Av alo s g uil ty

of thef t. At the p uni shmentphas e, t he tr ial court sent enced Av alo s t o tw o y ears i n the Tex as Dep artment of Cr imi nal Ju sti ce and ordered hi m to p ay

$2,9 00 i n rest it uti on. Av alo s’ s s entenc e w as sus pended, and he w as pla ced on c ommunity

su per v is ion for t hree y ears. This appeal ens ued.

II. D I S CUS S I ON By his f irst issue, Avalos conte nds th at the t rial cou rt d id notprope rly adm onish him re g ardin g the dang ers a nd di sadv antag es of sel f-represent ati on. W e di sag re e. The Si xth A mendment to t he U nit ed St ates C onst it uti on and Ar ti cl e I, Sec ti on 10 of the Tex as Con sti tuti on prov ide thata de fendant i n a c ri minal tr ial h a s th e r ig ht t o ass is tanc e o f couns el. U .S. C ON ST . amend. V I; T EX . C ON ST . art. I, § 10. The S ixth Amendment als o inc lud es the reci procal r ig ht t o s elf- re present ati on. W il li am s v. State , 252 S. W .3 d 35 3 , 3 5 6 ( T e x. C r i m . A p p . 2 0 0 8 ) (ci ti n g Faretta v. California , 422 U .S. 806, 818 (1 975) ); see als o Ol

iv er v. Sta te , 872 S.W .2d 713 , 715 -16 ( T ex. Crim. App . 199 4). Before bei ng per mitt ed to representhimsel f, a defendant must be made aw are of the dang ers a nd dis adv antag es of sel f represent ati on and must “k now ing ly and int ell ig ently” foreg o the ben ef its o f

h aving coun sel. Far

etta , 422 U .S. at 83 5; Geesli n v . St ate , 600 S.W .2d 3 09, 3 313 ( Tex . C ri m. App. 1980) ; see als o Hatten , 71 S.W .3d 3 32 334 (Tex . C ri m. App. 2002) (h old ing thatdes pit e Fa re tta , w aiv er of couns el must be “ know ing , i ntel li g ent a nd10

v olu ntar y .” ). A waiv er w il l not b e presumed or i mpli ed from a si len t record. Se e C ar nley v. Cochr an , 369 U .S. 506, 516 ( 1962)

. Rat her , t he record m u st s h ow thatthe defendant int ell ig entl y and understa ndi ng ly ele cte d to proceed w it hout couns el. Id .; Goff ney v. State , 843 S.W .2d 583 , 585 (Tex. Cr im. Ap p. 19 92). W hen adv is ing a de fendant aboutthe dang ers a n d d is adv antag es of sel f-r epresent ati on, t he tr ial j udg e mustinform the def endant “t hat t here are tec hni cal r ule s of ev iden ce an d proce dure , and he w ill notbe granted a n y special con siderat ion sole ly beca use h e a s s e rt e d h is p ro se rig hts.” Johns on v . St ate , 7 6 0 S

. W

. 2 d 2 7 7 , 2 7 9 (T e x. Cr im. App. 1988)

. “‘ [C ]our ts ind ulg e ev er

y re asona ble presumpt ion ag ain st w aiv er ’ and .

. . ‘do no t presum e acquiesce nce in th e loss of f und am ent al rig hts.’” John son v. Zerbst , 304 U. S. 4 58, 464 (1938)

. To ass ess w hether a w aiv er i s e ff ect iv e, c our

ts cons ide r the t otal ity of the c ircums tanc es. W il lia ms , 252 S.W .3d a t 356

. It is cl ear from the re cord tha t Au x il iar y C our t J udg e Gar

z a w ar ned Av alo s t hat h e w as “e x pect ed to foll ow th e Rule s o f Cr imi nal Procedu re .” J udg e Gar z a furt her

w ar ned Avalos that th e cou rt w ould hold him to the same stand a rd s a s t h e a ssistantdistrict a tt o rn e y tha t was pro se cu ti n g th e ca se . Gi ven J u d ge G a rza’ s a d m o n ish m e n ts an d Ju d ge Gon z alez’s com me nts, Avalos w entto trial w ith “his e ye s wi d e op en. ” Johns on , 760 S.W .2d a t 279

. Av alo s’ s first is sue is ov er ru led

. By his secon d issue, Av alos conten ds tha t the trial court erred by notg rantin g his request for the a ppo intm entof st and by cou nsel. Yet, Avalos n eithe r f rame s t he sta nda rd of rev iew nor ex pla ins how

the all e ged “ e rror” i s rev ersi ble

. It is w ell es tabl is hed t hat a n acc used has no abs olu te r ig ht t o hy br id re present ati on. E.g. , Lan der s v . St ate , 55011

S

. W .2d 272 (Tex. Cr im. Ap p.1 977 ). A tri al court m ay, i n its discretion , howev er, perm it both couns el and t he ac cus ed to j oin tl y par ti ci pate in the c ase. See Webb v. Sta te , 533 S.W .2d 7 80, 7 84 n. 2 ( Tex . C ri m. App. 1976)

. The record i n thi s c ase ind ic ates thatAv alo s eventua lly

w ithdre w

the requestbystating, “I mad e my bed an d I’ll li e in it.” Ev en i f w e w er e to cons tr ue Av alo s’ s req uestas a re- ass erti o n o f hi s r ig ht t o couns el, a de fendant’s r ig ht t o w it hdraw hi s w aiv er

of the r ig ht t o c ounse l is not w it hout it s li mits

. “Tr ial co urts hav e the duty , and di sc re ti on, to maint ain the order ly flow and admini strati on of j udi ci al proceed ing s, inc lud ing the ex er ci se of a defendant’ s r ig ht t o coun sel.” Me dle y v

. St ate , 47 S.W .3d 1 7, 23 ( Tex . Ap p.–Amar il lo 2000, pet. re f’d) ( ci ti ng F a r etta , 4 2 2 U

. S. at 8 34 n .46 ). A defend ant“does no t have the right to repe ate dly altern ate his position on the rig ht to coun sel and thereb y delay tri a l. ” Id . (c it in g United States v. Pol

lan i , 146 F .3d 2 69, 2 73 ( 5th C ir . 199 8) ). A “d eci si on of the tr ial courtas to the ef fect th e reclam ation of the right by

the de fend antw ould have on the orderly adm inistration of

justice w ill notbe distu rbed on ap pea l absen t an ab use o f discretion. ” Id

. at 24

. In t his ca se, the aux il iar y courtcould hav e v iew ed Av alo s’ s req uestas an at tempt to de lay a trial that had bee n set fo r Novembe r 20, 200 6, but did no t begin unt il February 20, 2 007. Therefore, w e find no abus e of di sc re ti on. Av alo s’ s sec ond iss ue i s o v er ru led

. III . C ONCL US I ON The ju dg ment of the tr ial co urt i s a ff ir med.

_________

_________

______ RO GELI O VA LDE Z Chief Justice Do not p ubl is h. T EX . R. A PP . P. 47 .2(b). Me moran dum Opi nio n del iv ered and filed thi s t he 30t h day

of Dec ember , 200 8.