State v. Smith, 414 P.3d 1092

Smith pleaded guilty to damage to jail property (third-degree felony) and attempted damage to jail property (class A misdemeanor) pursuant to a plea deal that included release from custody.
After rearrest on other matters, appointed counsel withdrew for conflict; conflict counsel also withdrew shortly before a November 10 hearing and replacement counsel had not yet appeared.
At the November hearing Smith moved to withdraw his pleas; the court set that motion for hearing and indicated sentencing might occur if withdrawal was denied.
The court attempted a colloquy about self-representation; Smith largely refused to answer questions but repeatedly insisted he be sentenced that day and said he did not need a lawyer for sentencing.
The court denied the motion to withdraw, found Smith had chosen to represent himself for sentencing, and imposed consecutive prison terms (0–1 year and 0–5 years).
On appeal the Utah Court of Appeals held Smith’s waiver of counsel for sentencing was not knowingly and intelligently made, vacated the sentences, and remanded for further proceedings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Smith validly waived his right to counsel for sentencing	State: Smith unequivocally chose to proceed pro se and the court reasonably warned him of risks; waiver valid	Smith: Did not make an unequivocal request and any waiver was not knowing and intelligent	Court: Smith clearly requested sentencing without counsel (voluntary) but waiver was not knowing and intelligent; vacated sentences and remanded

State v. Pedockie, 137 P.3d 716 (Utah 2006) (standards for valid waiver of counsel and preference for on-record colloquy)
Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (U.S. 1975) (constitutional right to self-representation requires waiver be with eyes open)
State v. Frampton, 737 P.2d 183 (Utah 1987) (Frampton factors and need for penetrating colloquy to assess waiver)
State v. Bakalov, 979 P.2d 799 (Utah 1999) (defendant must clearly and unequivocally request self-representation)
State v. Casarez, 656 P.2d 1005 (Utah 1982) (right to counsel extends to sentencing proceedings)