856 F.3d 1184
8th Cir.2017Background
- Bradley J. Prucha was tried on multiple criminal counts; trial began Feb. 22, 2016; jury convicted on all counts and he was later sentenced to 840 months.
- Before and during trial Prucha repeatedly filed pro se motions to represent himself (four motions total), citing discovery access issues and dissatisfaction with counsel.
- The magistrate judge addressed discovery concerns twice; Prucha withdrew his first two pro se motions after hearings.
- On the third day of trial, just before damaging evidence was to be shown, Prucha moved to proceed pro se for a fourth time and said he had not seen all discovery and that counsel was not eliciting the questions he wanted.
- The district court twice asked whether Prucha was prepared to represent himself; he answered he had not seen all discovery; the court denied the fourth motion as untimely and because he was unprepared.
- Prucha did not renew the motion, testified at trial, appealed the denial of the fourth motion to proceed pro se; the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court erred by denying Prucha's fourth motion to proceed pro se mid-trial | Prucha argued denial violated his Faretta right to self-representation; his motion was timely enough and based on counsel inadequacy and discovery access issues | Government/district court argued the motion was untimely (made after trial commenced and mid-third day) and Prucha was unprepared to waive counsel because he had not seen all discovery | Court held the motion was untimely and properly denied; affirmed conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (recognizes constitutional right to self-representation)
- United States v. Edelmann, 458 F.3d 791 (8th Cir. 2006) (self-representation right is not absolute)
- United States v. Kelley, 787 F.3d 915 (8th Cir. 2015) (motions to proceed pro se made on or after trial start often untimely)
- United States v. Wesley, 798 F.2d 1155 (8th Cir. 1986) (right to self-representation is unqualified only if asserted before trial)
- United States v. Oaks, 606 F.3d 530 (8th Cir. 2010) (court may deny pro se request if defendant is unprepared to represent self)
- United States v. Mosley, 607 F.3d 555 (8th Cir. 2010) (standard of review and timeliness considerations for Faretta requests)
- United States v. Warner, 428 F.2d 730 (8th Cir. 1970) (Constitution does not force a lawyer upon a defendant)