State v. Stiltner, 2019 Ohio 4631

On Dec. 11, 2018 police stopped a vehicle carrying Stiltner; a drug dog alerted and a search of Stiltner yielded methamphetamine and paraphernalia. He was indicted for aggravated possession of drugs (third‑degree felony).
Stiltner was appointed counsel, but two court‑appointed attorneys moved to withdraw (Stiltner had asked for new counsel and later terminated his second attorney); the court granted both motions.
At a pretrial hearing Stiltner appeared unrepresented, repeatedly vacillated about self‑representation, and initially refused to sign a waiver of counsel.
The trial court warned Stiltner at length that self‑representation was unwise and said it had determined Stiltner’s competency to stand trial was “in question.” Immediately after that statement Stiltner signed the waiver; the court did not make any finding that the waiver was knowing, intelligent, or voluntary, nor did it find Stiltner competent.
Trial proceeded; a jury convicted Stiltner of aggravated possession and the court sentenced him to 30 months. Stiltner appealed, raising (1) invalid waiver of counsel and (2) failure to order a competency exam/hearing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Stiltner)	Held
Whether the trial court validly accepted Stiltner’s waiver of counsel	Waiver was effective because Stiltner declined counsel and signed the waiver	Waiver was not knowing, intelligent, or voluntary because the court itself found competency was in question before he signed	Court: waiver acceptance was an abuse of discretion; first assignment sustained (waiver invalid)
Whether the court erred by failing to order a competency evaluation/hearing after competency was raised	No hearing required (implicit)	Court expressly stated Stiltner’s competency was at issue, so a competency hearing/evaluation was required under R.C. 2945.37	Court: remanded for the trial court to address competency; second assignment rendered moot pending that determination

Von Moltke v. Gillies, 332 U.S. 708 (waiver of counsel must be made with full understanding of charges, penalties, defenses, and consequences)
Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (waiver of counsel must be knowing and intelligent)
State v. Gibson, 45 Ohio St.2d 366 (Ohio standard for waiver inquiry and presumption against waiver)
Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (competency standard: factual and rational understanding and ability to consult with counsel)
Drope v. Missouri, 420 U.S. 162 (trial courts must inquire when indicia of incompetence exist)
State v. Berry, 72 Ohio St.3d 354 (due process forbids trial of legally incompetent defendant)
State v. Were, 94 Ohio St.3d 173 (competency hearing required when sufficient indicia of incompetency exist)
State v. Bock, 28 Ohio St.3d 108 (no hearing required absent indicia of incompetency)