Most federal courts of appeal require that defendants are aware of the "dangers and disadvantages" of self-representation prior to waiver of their Sixth Amendment right to counsel; this includes a knowledge of the range of punishment and procedural and evidentiary rules. In contrast, this Petitioner's Faretta hearing amounted to hollow formalities, whereby she was erroneously told that the maximum punishment was twenty years and that the trial court would provide some leeway. In addition, contrary to this court's holding in McKaskle v. Wiggins, 465 U.S. 168, emphasizing that "no absolute bar on standby counsel's participation is appropriate," the trial court in this case, restricted standby counsel's solicited participation.

Did the Faretta hearing in this case result in a decision that was contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, as determined by this honorable court?

Did the Faretta hearing in this case result in a decision that was contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, as determined by this honorable court?