Finch v. Kelley, 5:18CV00128 BRW/PSH. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20190611636
Visitors: 22
Filed: Jun. 10, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 10, 2019
Summary: ORDER BILLY ROY WILSON , District Judge . I have received proposed Findings and Recommendations (Doc. No. 19) from Magistrate Judge Patricia S. Harris. After careful review of the Findings and Recommendations, the timely objections received thereto, and a de novo review of the record, I approve and adopt the Findings and Recommendations in all respects. Under Faretta v. California, a Defendant has a Sixth Amendment right to represent himself if he knowingly and intelligently waives his
Summary: ORDER BILLY ROY WILSON , District Judge . I have received proposed Findings and Recommendations (Doc. No. 19) from Magistrate Judge Patricia S. Harris. After careful review of the Findings and Recommendations, the timely objections received thereto, and a de novo review of the record, I approve and adopt the Findings and Recommendations in all respects. Under Faretta v. California, a Defendant has a Sixth Amendment right to represent himself if he knowingly and intelligently waives his ..
More
ORDER
BILLY ROY WILSON, District Judge.
I have received proposed Findings and Recommendations (Doc. No. 19) from Magistrate Judge Patricia S. Harris. After careful review of the Findings and Recommendations, the timely objections received thereto, and a de novo review of the record, I approve and adopt the Findings and Recommendations in all respects.
Under Faretta v. California, a Defendant has a Sixth Amendment right to represent himself if he knowingly and intelligently waives his right to a lawyer.1 Having reviewed the evidence presented in the state court proceedings, I find that the State and the Arkansas Supreme Court's presumptively correct factual finding that Petitioner did not unequivocally request to represent himself was unreasonable and unsupported by the record. Petitioner made multiple, unequivocal requests to represent himself.
Accordingly habeas corpus relief is GRANTED for the reasons fully detailed in the Findings and Recommendations. The State is directed to either release Petitioner or provide him a new trial within 120 days of the date of this order. Judgment will be entered accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. 422 U.S. 806 (1975).
Source: Leagle
