1. Did Mr. Atwater show a violation of the right to determine the objective of his defense and his right to hold the State to its burden of proof of each element beyond, and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt, as articulated by this Court in McCoy v. Louisiana, when he had explicitly entered a plea of not guilty and maintained his innocence to counsel?

2. Whether the Florida Supreme Court may de facto overrule this Court and create a requirement of a preemptory objection to unknown trial strategy of conceding guilt and/or a contemporaneous objection by an accused individual to his own counsel when silenced by court rules and without foreknowledge that counsel would waive his rights?

Did Mr. Atwater show a violation of the right to determine the objective of his defense and his right to hold the State to its burden of proof of each element beyond, and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt, as articulated by this Court in McCoy v. Louisiana, when he had explicitly entered a plea of not guilty and maintained his innocence to counsel?