999 N.W.2d 670
Mich.2023Background:
- Frank King moved to proceed pro se; the trial court granted the request but kept appointed counsel as "advisory/standby" counsel.
- Trial began; after jury selection and some testimony King entered a no-contest plea under a Cobbs agreement negotiated with advisory counsel, capping the minimum at 72 months concurrent with another sentence.
- King later filed a delayed appeal arguing his waiver of the right to counsel was invalid and he was deprived of counsel at critical stages.
- The Court of Appeals found the waiver invalid (plain error) but concluded reversal was not required because advisory counsel effectively protected the underlying purposes of the right; this Court granted review/remanded and ultimately heard argument.
- The Michigan Supreme Court held that the right to counsel cannot be forfeited by failure to object, that an invalid waiver deprived King of counsel during critical stages (structural error), and that the error requires automatic reversal; standby counsel did not cure the defect.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Carines forfeiture applies when a defendant fails to object to an invalid waiver of counsel | People: Carines plain-error review applies; defendant forfeited by not objecting | King: Right to counsel is preserved absent a valid personal waiver and cannot be forfeited | Held: Carines does not apply; right to counsel cannot be forfeited and need not be affirmatively invoked |
| Whether a subsequent no-contest plea cured the earlier invalid waiver/deprivation of counsel | People: The plea and advisory counsel cured any defect | King: Plea does not necessarily cure an earlier invalid waiver, especially as to voluntariness | Held: A later plea does not necessarily cure the earlier structural deprivation; the invalid waiver required reversal |
| Whether advisory/standby counsel who negotiated the plea satisfied the Sixth Amendment | People: Participation by advisory counsel vindicated the right to counsel | King: Standby counsel does not substitute for a valid personal waiver or full Sixth Amendment representation | Held: Standby/advisory counsel does not cure an invalid waiver; presence alone is insufficient |
| Whether defendant had to affirmatively invoke or object to preserve right to counsel | People: Defendant should have objected to the waiver to preserve appellate review | King: Preservation is not required; right is preserved absent a valid waiver | Held: Defendant was not required to affirmatively invoke or object; preservation is unnecessary without a valid waiver |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Carines, 460 Mich. 750 (discusses plain-error/forfeiture review)
- Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (Sixth Amendment right to self-representation; waiver standards)
- People v. Anderson, 398 Mich. 361 (criteria for accepting a defendant's request to proceed pro se)
- Iowa v. Tovar, 541 U.S. 77 (knowing, voluntary, and intelligent waiver requirement for self-representation)
- People v. Vaughn, 491 Mich. 642 (distinguishing rights that may be forfeited and noting right-to-counsel preservation absent personal waiver)
- People v. Lane, 453 Mich. 132 (standby counsel does not validate an otherwise deficient waiver-of-counsel inquiry)
- People v. Lewis, 501 Mich. 1 (denial of counsel at preliminary examination is subject to harmless-error review; distinguishes critical stages)
- Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (right to counsel at critical stages)
- United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (distinguishing waiver from forfeiture)
- People v. Cobbs, 443 Mich. 276 (practice of stating a sentencing cap/agreement on the record prior to a plea)