Under Tennessee law, defense counsel in criminal trials has the power to make strategic decisions, including decisions to exercise or waive rights guaranteed under the federal constitution —with or without the client's permission— whether it contravenes the client's desires or not. Also, under Tennessee law, the trial courts, intermediate courts, and Supreme Court force defendants to forfeit Federal Constitutional rights, such as the sixth amendment right to counsel and self-representation, without due process. The Tennessee courts rely upon "mixed questions of law and fact," such as a waiver of the right to counsel, to be reviewed de-novo, accompanied by a presumption that the trial court's findings of fact are correct. In this context, the questions presented are;

I. Whether consistent with the fifth, sixth, and fourteenth amendments, an indigent defendant can be denied the right to present his own defense and compelled to accept representation by appointed counsel over his objection without being afforded due process?

II. Whether the Tennessee court's procedures for forcing a defendant to forfeit the Federal Constitutional rights to counsel and self-representation are so ambiguous that the Tennessee Appellate Courts consistently hand down arbitrary rulings that contradict each other and require the U.S. Supreme Court's clarification?

III. Whether the Tennessee courts are violating defendant's Federal Constitutional rights by reviewing self-representation waivers de-novo, in which each tier of appellate review can arbitrarily determine a new reason to force forfeiture without due process?

IV. Whether Tennessee's requirements to waive counsel and proceed pro se are so ambiguous that following step by step procedure amounts to judicial misconduct and results in the forfeiture of the U.S. Constitutional right under the Sixth Amendment to self-representation?

Whether an indigent defendant can be denied the right to present his own defense and compelled to accept representation by appointed counsel over his objection without being afforded due process