This case presents important issues concerning the Sixth Amendment right to represent oneself in a criminal proceeding and the fair administration of justice in Texas. Petitioner respectfully presents these issues, which warrant the involvement of this Court, for review:

I. Whether the 6th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution prevent a State appellate court from imputing a finding to a trial judge that a defendant suffered severe mental illness sufficient to deny him the right to represent himself when that trial court first found no more than that the defendant had "issues" and later explicitly denied that its ruling was based on the defendant's mental illness?

2. Whether a trial court's undefined and legally unsupported "extremely high" requirement of legal proficiency from a defendant wishing to represent himself can be allowed to stand, when that standard comports with neither Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975), nor Indiana v. Edwards, 554 U.S. 164 (2008), and would preclude virtually all lay people from representing themselves?

Whether the 6th and 14th Amendments prevent a State appellate court from imputing a finding of severe mental illness to deny a defendant's right to self-representation when the trial court did not explicitly base its ruling on mental illness