Opinion ID: 1201386
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: New Trial Motion and Sentencing

Text: Following trial, Henry moved to substitute counsel or in the alternative to represent himself. The court denied his motion. Nonetheless, Henry was allowed to file a 144-page handwritten motion for new trial in addition to that filed by defense counsel, and was permitted to participate at the ensuing oral argument. In connection with his ruling on the self-representation issue, the trial judge stated in part: I feel that at this point in the proceedings where the only thing left in this case is almost purely legal matters, I don't believe that there is any way that you can possibly under the consequences have self representation.... Henry argues that this ruling unconstitutionally denied him the right to represent himself. We need not decide this issue, given our decision to remand for resentencing on other grounds. We note, however, that under Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975), a death-eligible defendant may represent himself at sentencing, see Silagy v. Peters, 905 F.2d 986, 1007 (7th Cir.1990), provided he or she understands the proceedings, the possible consequences, and the disadvantages of acting as his or her own attorney. Harding v. Lewis, 834 F.2d 853, 857 (9th Cir.1987). See also State v. Harding, 137 Ariz. 278, 286-87, 670 P.2d 383, 391-92 (1983). In State v. Martin, 102 Ariz. 142, 146, 426 P.2d 639, 643 (1967) this court said: The fundamental question then is not one of the wisdom of defendant's judgment but whether the defendant's waiver of counsel was made in an intelligent, understanding and competent manner. The answer to this question must depend upon the particular facts and circumstances surrounding each case, including the background, experience and conduct of the accused. All factors relating to the determination of whether the defendant knew exactly what he was doing when he waived his right to counsel are relevant. Lack of legal skill is not the test. Id. The trial judge will have to make this determination should Henry again insist on representing himself at the resentencing proceeding.