Accordingly, defendant's right to counsel was not violated by the trial court. Lane involved a trial court's failure to advise a defendant of the right to counsel prior to a subsequent trial on an habitual offender charge and prior to the sentencing. The defendant had properly waived his right to counsel for the trial on the underlying charge. The Court discussed the standard of review for subsequent waivers of counsel in a trial setting and determined that the alleged error was an unpreserved, non constitutional plain error that was to be like any other trial error. Lane does not assist this Court in addressing the specific issue before us regarding the rights to be afforded to a defendant prior to a probation revocation hearing.
Defendant here complains that there was no valid waiver of counsel prior to the initial hearing.
This is not a case dealing with the subsequent waiver of counsel in trial proceedings.