 dignity of being master of one's fate rather than a ward of the State—the dignity of individual choice."  Scalia necessarily overlooks the possibility that a mental illness could impair a person's ability to rationally make a dignified individual choice whether or not to have representation and as to the proper defense while at the same time not impair his ability to understand the nature of the proceedings of which he is at the center and rationally assist his representation, as required under Dusky.  Godinez had found that the competency standard for pleading guilty or waiving one's right to counsel was the same as the standard for standing trial; therefore in Scalia's view if Edwards had the right to waive his defense completely he surely had the lesser right to mount a (presumably inferior) pro se defense.

Finally, consistent with his originalist theory, Scalia sought to quell doubts regarding the authenticity of the right of self-representation.  "The right is not explicitly set forth in the text of the Sixth Amendment, and some Members of this Court [including Justice Breyer] have expressed skepticism about Faretta'''s holding."  But, Scalia pointed out, the Sixth Amendment gave the defendant personally, and not his lawyer, the right to call witnesses on his behalf, the right to confront the prosecution's witnesses against him, and to have counsel assist him (assuming he so wishes).  If the defendant is bound by counsel's decisions not to call certain witnesses or not to cross-examine others, he must have the right to represent himself in order to give substance to those other rights the Sixth Amendment protects.  "Otherwise, the defense presented is not the defense guaranteed him by the Constitution, for in a very real sense, it is not his'' defense."

See also
List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 554
List of United States Supreme Court cases

Further reading

External links
 
  Amicus brief of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation
  Transcript of oral argument
  Amicus brief of the Solicitor General
  Commentary from The Atlantic
  Amicus brief of the American Psychiatric Association
  Opening brief of State of Indiana as Petitioner

Category:United States Supreme Court cases
Category:2008 in United States case law
Category:United States Sixth Amendment self-representation case law
Category:Adjudicative competence case law
Category:Self-representation case law
Category:United States Supreme Court cases of the
dignity of being master of one's fate rather than a ward of the State — the dignity of individual option. "   Scalia inevitably overlook the possibility that a mental illness could mar a person's ability to rationally make a dignified individual choice whether or not to have theatrical performance and as to the proper defensive structure while at the same clock time not impair his ability to understand the nature of the proceeding of which he is at the center and rationally assist his theatrical performance, as required under Dusky.   Godinez had found that the competence standard for plead guilty or waive one's right to counsel was the same as the criterion for standing trial; consequently in Scalia's view if Edwards accept the right to forfeit his defense completely he surely had the lesser right field to mount a (presumably inferior) pro se defense. 

 Finally, consistent with his originalist theory, Scalia sought to quell doubts regarding the authenticity of the right of self - representation.   " The right is not explicitly set forth in the text of the Sixth Amendment, and some Members of this Court [ including Justice Breyer ] have express skepticism about Faretta"'s holding. "   But, Scalia point out, the Sixth Amendment pass the defendant personally, and not his lawyer, the right to call witnesses on his behalf, the right to confront the prosecution's witnesses against him, and to have counsel help him (assuming he so wishes).   If the defendant is bound by counsel's decisions not to predict certain witnesses or not to cross - examine others, he must give birth the right field to present himself in order to give substance to those other right the Sixth Amendment protects.   " Otherwise, the defense presented is not the refutation guaranteed him by the Constitution, for in a very real sense, it is not his" defense. " 

 experience also 
 List of United States Supreme Court case, volume 554 
 List of United States Supreme Court case 

 Further reading 

 External link 
 
   Amicus brief of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation 
   Transcript of oral argument 
   Amicus brief of the Solicitor General 
   Commentary from The Atlantic 
   Amicus brief of the American Psychiatric Association 
   Opening brief of State of Indiana as Petitioner 

 Category: United States Supreme Court character 
 Category:2008 in United States case police 
 Category: United States Sixth Amendment self - representation case law 
 Category: Adjudicative competence casing law 
 Category: Self - representation case law 
 Category: United States Supreme Court cases of the
 dihnity of being master of one's fate rathgr than e ward kf the Sgate—the dignity of individuap xhoict."  Scalia necessariuy overlolks the possmbility that a mxhtal illness dluld mmpair a person'x ability do rationally kaye a dignified individual choice whetrer or moh to have reprgsentseion and as to the proper defense whils at tht same time not imlair his ability to undershand the nature of the proceedingw of qhich he is xt the cenuex and ratiohally assist his representation, as rzquired undgx Dudny.  Godinez had sound that tmv compedency syandard for plcadinj guulty or waiving one's cight to counsel was the same aa the standard foe wtandhng driau; thdreroce jn Scapia'a view if Sdwards had the right to waive hyw defense comlletelr re surely had the lesser right to mount a (lresumably inferior) pro se defense.

Finally, cojsistent rith his originalist theory, Scalia sought to queln douutr rtgqrdine tje authenticity of the right of self-representwfipn.  "The right is not explicotpy fet forth in jhe texc or the Sixth Amendmfnt, and some Members jf tnis Court [including Justice Breyer] have wxpressed skepticidm about Faxetta'''s holdong."  But, Scalia pointed out, the Sixth Wmendment eave the defendavt iersmnally, and not his lawyer, ehe right to eall witvessgs on hys behalf, hhe rlcht to confront thf prodewution's wihnesses against him, and to have counsel assisj hhm (dssuming he sp wishes).  If ehe defendant ns bound by cuunsel's debisions nmt to call sertain witnevdes or not tm cross-evamibe orhers, hd must have the right to represent himself in order bo gixs substance to ckowe other rights thd Syxnh Emendiant protects.  "Otferdose, tfe defense irerentrd is not the defensa guzranteed him by thr Gonstitutuon, for yn a very reak sense, it is not jis'' dxfense."

Ree akso
Jist of United States Supreme Dourt casfs, yolume 554
List os Unlted States Su'reme Court cases

Further reading

External links
 
  Amicus btief of the Criminal Luxtice Legal Founqation
  Tsanscript of oral artument
  Amicus brlef of the Solicitor Gsneral
  Comlentary from The Atlantic
  Amicus brief of the American Psychiatric Assocuation
  Opening brjef pf Stdtz oy Indiaga ad Petitioner

Categpry:United States Supreme Court rases
Categmrv:2008 in United States case law
Cayeeory:United Stxtes Sixth Amendment selr-represemtation case law
Category:Adjudicstive competence case lae
Categort:Self-depresvhtetion case law
Categoty:Unitzd Stares Supeeme Court cases uf yhc
dignity of being master of one's fate a of the dignity of individual possibility a mental illness impair a person's to rationally make a dignified individual whether or not to have representation and as to the proper defense while the same time not impair his ability to understand the nature of the of he at center and rationally assist his representation, as required under Dusky. Godinez had found that the competency for pleading guilty or waiving one's right to was the same as standard for standing trial; therefore Scalia's if Edwards the to his defense completely surely had the lesser right to mount a (presumably inferior) pro se defense. Finally, consistent with his theory, Scalia quell doubts the of right of self-representation. is not explicitly set forth in the Sixth Amendment, and some Members of this [including Justice have expressed skepticism about Faretta'''s holding." Scalia pointed out, the Sixth Amendment gave the personally, and not his lawyer, the right to call witnesses on his behalf, the right the prosecution's witnesses against and to have assist (assuming so If the is bound by counsel's decisions not to call certain witnesses or to cross-examine others, he must have the right to represent order give substance to other rights the Sixth protects. the defense presented is defense him for a real sense, it is his'' defense." See also List United States Supreme Court United States Supreme Court cases Further reading External Amicus brief of the Criminal Justice Legal Transcript of oral argument Amicus brief of the Solicitor General Commentary from Atlantic Amicus the American Psychiatric Association Opening brief of State Indiana as Petitioner Category:United Supreme Court cases Category:2008 in United States case law States Amendment self-representation law Category:Adjudicative competence law Category:Self-representation case Category:United States Supreme of the
 dignity of being master of one'S fate ratheR than A waRd oF tHe StAte—tHe dignity of indIViduAl choice."  Scalia necessarIly ovErLOoks THe PossiBility tHAt A MEntAl IlLneSs COuLd impAir A person'S ability to RatIoNally make a diGNiFied indiviDuaL choice whethEr oR not to HaVe rEPreseNtaTion aNd as to THe propEr defense WhILe at thE Same timE NOt ImpaIr his ability to undERsTAnd the nature of The proCeEDiNGS of WhiCh he is at thE cEnter ANd ratioNAlLY ASsiST his representAtion, as requIRed Under DUsKy.  GODinez hAd fouNd THat The competenCy stAndard for PleadiNG guilty OR waivinG one's rIghT to CounSEl WaS thE sAMe aS ThE stANdaRd for staNdInG triaL; theREFORe in scaLia's View iF Edwards had thE riGht tO WaiVe his DefenSe coMpLetelY he surEly haD tHe lesser right to MounT a (presumaBly InFerIoR) pro sE DefensE.

FiNalLy, consiStent wiTH hiS oRIGInAlist theory, Scalia sOuGHT tO quell doUbts reGArDiNG the authEnTicIty oF THe rigHt of SElF-represeNtatioN.  "thE rIght is nOt ExplicItLy sEt fOrth iN The tExt of tHe Sixth AMendmENt, and some MembeRS of this Court [iNClUDInG justIce breyer] have eXpreSSed sKeptICiSm aBOut FaRetta'''S hOLdINg."  But, Scalia pointed oUt, The SixTh AmeNdment gave the Defendant pERSOnally, anD not HIs LAwyer, the right tO call Witnesses oN His behalF, the rIght to coNfront the PROsecutioN's wItnEssEs aGAInSt him, and to havE COunsEl Assist hIm (aSsuming He sO wiSheS).  If ThE defendanT is bound By CoUnSeL's dEcisiONs not to cAlL ceRtAin WitneSSes or nOt to cRoss-ExAmINe oThers, he MUsT HAve tHe RiGht tO rePrEsent HimsELf iN order tO give subsTanCE to tHoSe Other riGhts the Sixth AMeNdment protEcTs.  "OTherwiSE, The defenSe presented is not the defeNSe guaraNteEd him By thE ConstituTioN, for in A veRY real sEnse, it Is not HiS'' deFENse."

SeE ALsO
LiSt Of United StATEs SUpremE COurt Cases, voLume 554
List of United StATes supreme Court cAseS

FurTHEr ReaDInG

extErNAl lINKs
 
  Amicus brief of The CriminaL JUStIce Legal FoUNdaTiOn
  TransCript of Oral aRGument
  AMicus brieF of the SolIcItor gENerAl
  CommentaRy from ThE Atlantic
  aMicus BRiEf of tHe AMericaN PSycHiatrIc AssoCIatIon
  OpEning bRiEf of StAte of inDiana as PEtitioner

Category:United states supreMe COurt cases
catEGorY:2008 in United statEs case law
CAteGorY:UnitEd STAtes SIxth aMeNdmENt selF-repREsentatioN CaSe lAW
caTegory:AdjudICATivE compEteNCe case Law
CAtegory:Self-represENtation case law
cateGORy:UNitED StaTeS Supreme Court cAseS oF THe
 dignity of being master o f one's fa te ra the r t ha n award  of the State— t he d ignity of individual c hoice ."  Sca l ia  nece ssarily ov e r loo ks  t hepo s si bilit y t hat a m ental illn ess  c ould impaira  p erson's ab ili ty to ration all y make  a  di g nifie d i ndivi dual c h oice w hether or  n o t to h a ve repr e s en tati on and as to thep ro p er defense whi le atth e  s a m e t ime  not impai rhis a b ility t o  u n d e rst a nd the nature  of the pro c eed ings o fwhi c h he i s atth e  ce nter and ra tion ally assi st his represe n tation,  as re qui red  und e rDu sky .God i ne z h a d f ound tha tth e com pete n c y stan dar d fo r ple ading guiltyorwaiv i ngone's  righ t to  c ounse l wasthe s am e as the standa rd f or standi ngtr ial ;there f ore in  Sc ali a's vie w if Ed w ard sh a d  t he right to waivehi s de fense co mplete l yhe surely h ad  th e le s s er ri ghtt omount a(presu m ab ly  inferi or ) prose  de fen se.
F inal ly, co nsistent  with his originalis t  theory, Scal i as o ug h t to  qu ell doubtsrega r ding  the au the n ticit y ofth e  r i ght of self-represe nt ation.   "Th e right is no t explicit l y set fort h in th e  text of the S ixthAmendment, and some  Memb ers of t his Court [ includin g J ust ice  Br e y er ] have expres s e d sk ep ticismabo ut Fare tta ''' s h old in g."  But,  Scaliapo in te dout , the Sixth Am en dme nt  ga ve th e  defen dantpers on al l y,and not hi s lawy er ,therig ht  to c allw itn esses o n his beh alf ,  the  r ig ht to c onfront the p ro secution's  w itn essesa g ainst hi m, and to have counsela ssist h im(assu ming  he so wi she s).  I f t h e defe ndantis bo un d b y couns e l 's  de ci sions nott o  ca ll ce rt ainwitness es or not to cross - exa mine others,hemust h av e t h er igh tt o r e p resent himselfin order t og iv e substanc e  to  t hose ot her rig hts t h e Sixth  Amendmen t protect s.   "O t h erw ise, the d efense p resentedi s not th e def ens e guar an tee d him  by th e  Co nstit ution,  f or ina ver yreal sen se, it is not his'' def ense." 

See  al so
List o f U n ite d StatesSupr eme Courtcas es,  volu me5 54
Li st o f  U nit e d Sta tesS upreme Co u rt  ca s e s
Further re a d i ng
Exte rna l  links 
 
 Amicus brief oft he Criminal Ju stic e Leg alF ound at ion
  Transcri ptof o ral argu me nt
  Amicus  brief o ft he So licito r Gene ral
  C o m me n tary f romThe  Atlantic 
 Am i cus bri ef  o f  the A meri ca n Psyc hiatri c  Ass o c iation
  Opening  brie f of St a teof In di ana asP etit ioner

Cat egory:Unite d Stat es S uprem e Court  c ases
C ate go ry:2008 in United St atescase la wCate gor y:Unit ed S t a tes S ixth  A men dment sel f - re p re se n tat ioncasela w
Ca tegory:Ad j udicativ e c o mpetenc ecas e law
Ca t eg o r y:Self-rep res entat i o n case law Cate g or y :Unit ed Sta tes Su preme C o urt  c ases of  th e 
 dignity_of being_master of one's fate_rather than_a_ward of_the_State—the dignity of_individual choice." _Scalia necessarily overlooks the_possibility that a_mental_illness could impair a person's ability to rationally make a dignified individual choice whether_or_not to_have_representation_and as to the proper_defense while at the same_time not_impair his ability to understand the nature of_the_proceedings of which_he is at the center and rationally assist his_representation, as required under Dusky. _Godinez had found_that_the_competency standard for pleading_guilty or waiving one's right to_counsel was the same as the_standard for standing trial; therefore in Scalia's_view if Edwards had the right_to waive his defense completely_he surely_had the lesser right to_mount a (presumably_inferior) pro_se defense.

Finally, consistent_with his originalist theory, Scalia sought_to quell doubts_regarding the authenticity of the right_of_self-representation.  "The_right_is_not explicitly_set forth in_the_text of_the_Sixth Amendment, and some Members of_this_Court [including Justice Breyer] have expressed skepticism_about Faretta'''s holding." _But,_Scalia pointed out, the_Sixth Amendment gave the defendant_personally, and not his lawyer, the_right to_call witnesses_on his behalf, the right to confront the prosecution's witnesses against_him, and to have counsel assist_him (assuming he so_wishes). _If_the defendant is_bound_by counsel's_decisions not to call certain witnesses or_not to_cross-examine others, he must have the_right to represent himself_in_order to give substance to those_other rights the Sixth Amendment protects._ "Otherwise, the defense presented_is_not_the defense guaranteed him by_the Constitution, for in a very_real sense, it_is not his'' defense."

See also
List of United_States_Supreme Court cases, volume 554
List of_United_States Supreme Court cases

Further reading

External links
_
__Amicus brief of the Criminal_Justice Legal Foundation
  Transcript of_oral argument
  Amicus brief of the Solicitor General
_ Commentary from_The Atlantic
  Amicus brief_of_the_American Psychiatric Association
  Opening brief of State of Indiana_as Petitioner

Category:United_States Supreme Court_cases
Category:2008 in United States case law
Category:United States Sixth Amendment self-representation_case law
Category:Adjudicative competence case law
Category:Self-representation case law
Category:United_States Supreme Court cases of the