State v. Morrison, 2012 Ohio 2154

Morrison was arrested Jan. 23, 2011 and charged with obstructing official business, resisting arrest, and speeding; his brother Grant was the front passenger.
Appointed counsel was converted to standby and Morrison was allowed to proceed pro se; cases were consolidated for trial.
A bench trial was held on Aug. 4, 2011, after Morrison waived jury trial.
Morrison was convicted on obstructing official business, resisting arrest, and speeding and sentenced to 20 days (70 days suspended on probation) for obstructing and 10 days concurrent for resisting arrest.
The appellant timely challenged the waiver of counsel and self-representation and challenged the sufficiency/weight of the evidence; the court reversed and remanded on the waiver issue.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was there a valid waiver of the right to counsel and adequate advisement on self-representation?	Morrison argues waiver was not knowing and intelligent and dangers of self-representation were not explained.	State contends waiver complied with applicable rules.	Waiver not adequately established; sustained.
Was the obstructing official business conviction supported by sufficient evidence and not against the weight of the evidence?	Morrison argues evidence insufficient and verdict against weight of the evidence.	State asserts evidence suffices and supports guilt.	Premature to decide due to waiver issue.
Was the resisting arrest conviction supported by sufficient evidence and not against the weight of the evidence?	Morrison argues evidence insufficient and verdict against weight of the evidence.	State asserts evidence suffices and supports guilt.	Premature to decide due to waiver issue.

Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975) (right to self-representation implied by Sixth Amendment)
Gibson, 45 Ohio St.2d 366, 345 N.E.2d 399 (1976) (waiver must be knowing, intelligent, and voluntary; adequate warnings required)
Von Moltke v. Gillies, 332 U.S. 708 (1948) (necessity of understanding charges and penalties for valid waiver)
State v. Martin, 33 Ohio St.3d 1, 514 N.E.2d 407 (1987) (waiver must be informed and aware of consequences; general cautions insufficient)
State v. Brooke, 113 Ohio St.3d 199, 863 N.E.2d 1024 (2007) (on-record waiver required; sophistication factors considered)
State v. Dyer, 117 Ohio App.3d 92, 689 N.E.2d 1034 (1996) (presumption against waiver; burden on state to show knowing waiver)
Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (1938) (standard for determining when waiver of counsel is valid)
McKaskle v. Wiggins, 465 U.S. 168 (1984) (limits on hybrid representation; no right to co-counsel by defendant)
Gibson (state case), 45 Ohio St.2d 366 (1976) (see above; core standard for waiver inquiries)