State v. Covernali

A trial court may deny a motion for self-representation or appointment of counsel if “it has reason to conclude that granting the motion would result in disruption of proceedings.” However, “the record must include some indication of how the trial court actually weighed the relevant competing interests involved.” State v. Hightower, 361 Or 412, 418, 421 (2017).

Defendant appealed convictions for theft, felon in possession of a firearm, unlawful use of a weapon, and reckless endangerment. After waiving counsel, he promptly sought reinstatement because computer illiteracy, library computer problems, and COVID-19 quarantine prevented trial preparation. The trial court denied the request, citing his waiver and intent to delay trial. Defendant challenged both rulings, arguing that his waiver was invalid and did not permanently relinquish his right to counsel. State argued that the valid waiver and Defendant’s efforts to delay supported denial. The Court upheld the waiver but separately reviewed the denial of reinstatement for abuse of discretion because appointing counsel would require a continuance. Although disruption may justify denial, “the record must include some indication of how the trial court actually weighed the relevant competing interests involved.” State v. Hightower, 361 Or 412, 421 (2017). Defendant had changed his representation status only once and promptly presented legitimate, unforeseen barriers to preparation. His intent to delay did not alone justify denial. The trial court abused its discretion by neither reinstating counsel nor taking “some other action to allow defendant time to obtain counsel or prepare for trial pro se with access to legal resources.” State v. Covernali, 341 Or App 476, 486 (2025). Reversed and remanded.