further. Counsel’s pursuit of bifurcation until the eve of sentencing and their partial presentation of a 
mitigation case suggest that their incomplete investigation was the result of inattention, not reasoned 
strategic judgment. In deferring to defense counsel’s decision not to pursue a mitigation case despite their 
unreasonable investigation, the Maryland Court of Appeals unreasonably applied Strickland.” 
Waiving Counsel 
Sometimes, a defendant wishes to waive counsel and appear pro se, or represent him or herself at trial. The 
Court, in Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975), held that the Sixth Amendment includes the defendant’s 
right to represent himself or herself.  The Faretta Court found that, where a defendant is adamantly opposed 
to representation, there is little value in forcing him or her to have a lawyer. The Court stressed that it 
was important for the trial court to make certain and establish a record that the defendant knowingly and 
intelligently gave up his or her rights. 
“Although a defendant need not himself have the skill and experience of a lawyer in order competently 
and intelligently to choose self-representation, he should be made aware of the dangers and disadvantages of 
self-representation, so that the record will establish he knows what he is doing and his choice is made with 
eyes open.” 
12 
In McKaskle v. Wiggins, 465 U.S. 168, at 174 (1984), the Court held that a “defendant does not have a 
constitutional right to receive personal instruction from the trial judge on courtroom procedure. Nor does 
the Constitution require judges to take over chores for a pro se defendant that would normally be attended 
to by trained counsel as a matter of course.” The constitutional right to self-representation does not mean 
that the defendant is free to obstruct the trial, and a judge may terminate self-representation by a defendant 
who is obstructing the process. Frequently, judges will assign a standby counsel to assist defendants. Stand-
by counsel is an attorney who can be available to answer questions of a pro se defendant, and if necessary, 
standby counsel can step in if the defendant is engaging in misconduct. 
Conclusion 
Court jurisdiction determines where a case will be filed and which courthouse has the legal authority to 
hear a case. Jurisdiction can be based on geography, subject matter, or seriousness of the offense. Jurisdiction 
is also divided between trial courts (original jurisdiction) and appellate courts (appellate jurisdiction). 
More than 51 court systems operate in the United States. We have a dual court system comprised of federal 
trial and appellate courts and state trial and appellate courts. Federal and state courts have similar hierarchical 
structures with cases flowing from lower trial courts through intermediate courts of appeals and up to the 
supreme courts. 
Defendants who wish to appeal their convictions are entitled to have their cases reviewed at least once, 
a mandatory appeal of right in the intermediate courts of appeal. After that, the review is discretionary 
and rare. Appellate courts generally affirm the decision of the trial courts, but may also reverse and remand 
the case back to the trial court if they determine that prejudicial error occurred.  At the intermediate 
appellate court level, judges most frequently affirm the trial court’s decision without writing an opinion, but 
sometimes the judges will write opinions informing the parties of their decision and the reasons for holding 
12. Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 835 (1975). 
Introduction to the American Criminal Justice System
307