Whitlow v. State
2016 Ark. App. 510
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Whitlow was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder (one in presence of a child) and kidnapping; total sentence 135 years consecutive.
- On the eve of trial Whitlow sought to discharge his court-appointed attorney (Ronald Davis) and said he intended to hire Teresa Bloodman, who had not entered an appearance.
- When told Bloodman had not filed in the case, Whitlow alternatively stated he would rather represent himself than have Davis continue.
- The trial court conducted an extensive Faretta-style colloquy, focusing heavily on Whitlow’s education and legal knowledge, and noted prior disruptive behavior.
- The court refused to allow pro se representation, concluding Whitlow had not made an unequivocal request and lacked competence; trial proceeded with Davis and the convictions were affirmed on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Whitlow's Argument | State/Trial Court Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court wrongly denied Whitlow’s request to represent himself (Faretta right) | Court improperly based refusal on Whitlow’s education and legal-knowledge; refusal was protective rather than because waiver was not knowing | Whitlow never unequivocally requested to proceed pro se; he sought substitute counsel (Bloodman), had shown disruptive behavior, and lacked demonstrated competence | Affirmed: no Faretta violation because request was not unequivocal and court could rely on orderly administration concerns |
Key Cases Cited
- Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975) (defendant has right to self-representation if waiver of counsel is voluntary, knowing, and intelligent)
- Jarrett v. State, 371 Ark. 100 (2007) (request to proceed pro se must be unequivocal; displeasure with counsel is not enough)
- Barnes v. State, 258 Ark. 565 (1975) (court may warn defendant about hazards of self-representation)
- Morgan v. State, 359 Ark. 168 (2004) (right to counsel not absolute; cannot manipulate right to frustrate court’s administration)
- Liggins v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 321 (2015) (change of counsel on eve of trial may be denied when sought primarily for delay)
- Williams v. State, 372 S.W.3d 358 (Ark. Ct. App. 2009) (standard of review on waiver knowing/intelligent)
- Walton v. State, 423 S.W.3d 56 (Ark. 2012) (waiver of counsel may occur pretrial or at trial)