This Petition presents an issue of fundamental importance to all defendants facing criminal prosecution in California: whether the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, as interpreted by this Court in Faretta v. California, 412 U.S. 206 (1975), permit trial courts to deny a request to proceed pro se, in the first instance, and on the grounds of the presiding judges accusations that the defendant has demonstrated an inability to conform his behavior to the rules of procedure and courtroom protocol, and accusation of anticipated disruption, and then pass on his own credibility in making the factual determination.

2. When a state's reviewing courts violate this Court's clearly established rules of law and manner, or transform this Court's rules into a specific legal rule, not announced by this Court, and such transformation results in depriving the defendant of substantial and procedural rights, and fundamental fairness, to which the law entitles him, may "suppression powers" be used and the case dismissed, as a remedy to discipline state courts for blatant disregards of the rights of Article VI of the Constitution?

Whether the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments permit a trial court to deny a defendant's request to proceed pro se based on the judge's accusations of the defendant's inability to conform behavior and anticipated disruption, while passing on the defendant's own credibility in making the factual determination