State v. Moore, 2012 Ohio 1958

Moore was convicted in 2000 of aggravated robbery and kidnapping with firearm specifications for the Hard Rock Cafe robbery; total sentence 33 years.
This court reversed the sentencing for due process reasons and remanded for resentencing after Moore I.
Resentencing occurred in 2005 (teleconference) over Moore’s objection; Moore appealed again arguing improper process.
On remand, this court held Moore had a constitutional right to be physically present; resentencing occurred in 2006.
Numerous federal proceedings (Moore III) addressed trials and self-representation issues; the district court ordered relief but stayed pending petitions.
Retrial occurred beginning April 1, 2010, Moore elected to proceed pro se after a lengthy colloquy; jury found Moore guilty on all counts including firearm specifications, with an aggregate 33-year term.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Adequacy of inquiry into counsel dissatisfaction	Moore contends the court failed to adequately investigate his complaints about appointed counsel.	Moore argues substitution was warranted due to counsel’s workload and dissatisfaction.	Court did not abuse discretion; inquiry sufficient.
Ineffective assistance due to counsel's workload	Moore asserts Sims’s workload rendered representation ineffective.	State contends workload did not prevent effective representation and extensions aided preparation.	No reversible ineffective-assistance finding.
Timely appointment of counsel	Appointment five days before trial deprived Moore of effective counsel.	Time to confer and prepare was provided; federal extension eased timing.	No reversible error; assignment overruled.
Waiver of counsel and self-representation	Waiver was not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily made.	Record shows explicit on-record colloquy and signed waivers.	Waiver valid; self-representation affirmed.
Plea negotiations and prior offers	State allegedly refused to extend prior plea offers post-retrial.	Record inadequate to prove existence of prior offers; cannot review.	Assignment overruled for lack of record evidence.

State v. Deal, 17 Ohio St.2d 17 (1969) (trial court must adequately investigate claims about counsel)
State v. McBreen, 54 Ohio St.2d 315 (1978) (trial strategy waivers may be valid even without consent)
State v. Fanning, 1 Ohio St.3d 3 (1982) (speedy-trial waiver rationale applies with trial preparation)
State v. Gibson, 45 Ohio St.2d 366 (1976) (valid waiver requires knowing, intelligent relinquishment)
State v. Martin, 2003-Ohio-1499 (2003) (waiver of counsel requires explicit on-record awareness)
Von Moltke v. Gillies, 332 U.S. 708 (1948) (waiver must be informed by a broad understanding of the matter)
Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975) (right to self-representation requires knowing, voluntary waiver)
State v. Jackson, 145 Ohio App.3d 223 (2001) (no presumption against waiver; requires proper inquiry)