this case presents an important issue concerning what constitutes "the right to have the assistance of counsel" under the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This Petition presents the opportunity for this Court to provide a BRIGHT LINE that defines the specific intent of Congress, thus holding the lower courts accountable to this Court's jurisprudence.

Whether a district court can force counsel upon a person even without inquiring the provisions set forth in §3006(A);

Whether a district court can force counsel upon a person even after the person time and again fired the counsel that the district court in open court, and after the fact acknowledged that the person never waived his/her right to the assistance of counsel, but still forced counsel without the accused's permission, consent, or consent by assent; and

Whether a Circuit Court can disregard and/or ignore the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as unconstitutionally void-for-vagueness, and thus, give a Circuit the consent to ignore both this Court's jurisprudence as well as its own precedent rule with regards to the Sixth Amendment's "right to have the assistance of counsel."

Whether a district court can force counsel upon a person even without inquiring the provisions set forth in §3006(A)