October Term 2007 · Docket 07-208
Can a court deny self-representation to a competent defendant?
Indiana argues a higher competency standard prevents trial chaos. Edwards argues the Sixth Amendment guarantees self-representation.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Fisher argued the trial court acted to prevent chaos.
Mr. Stancil argued the Sixth Amendment grants the defense to the accused.
justice_questions
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 11-7 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 11-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-35 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 35-3 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 35-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-41 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 25-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 17-39 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 17-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 41-3 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 41-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 15-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 15-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 9-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 9-21
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case tests whether a state can force a competent defendant to accept counsel. The core conflict pits trial order against constitutional autonomy.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 11-7 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 11-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-35 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 17-39 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 17-39
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 26, 2008.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 45-47
What each side wants
Indiana wants the Court to allow a higher competency standard for self-representation.
Edwards wants the Court to protect the right to self-representation for competent defendants.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 11-7 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 11-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-35 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 17-39 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 17-39
What each side says
Indiana argues a higher standard prevents the trial from descending into a farce.
Edwards argues the defense belongs to the accused, not the state.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 11-7 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 11-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-35 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 17-39 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 17-39
What the justices asked
Justice Scalia questioned whether the proposed test is vague.
Justice Ginsburg asked if speech impediments would automatically bar self-representation.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 35-3 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 35-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-41 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 25-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 41-3 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 41-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 15-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 15-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 9-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 9-21
Why it matters
This dispute defines the boundary between judicial control and personal liberty. It determines whether states can override a defendant's choice of counsel. The outcome shapes the fundamental structure of criminal trials nationwide.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 11-7 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 11-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-35 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 17-39 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 17-39
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 35-3 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 35-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-41 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 25-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 41-3 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 41-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 15-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 15-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 9-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 9-21
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 11-7 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 11-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-35 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 17-39 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 17-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 11-7 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 11-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-35 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 17-39 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 17-39
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.