STATE OF MISSOURI vs. PAMELA RUTH CAMPANELLA

Hermitage, MO - Criminal defense lawyer represented defendant Pamela Ruth Campanella with complaining in a single point that the court erred in finding that she knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived counsel in violation of her right to counsel and due process because there was neither an express nor an implied waiver of counsel.

Pamela Ruth Campanella (“Defendant”) complains in a single point that the court

erred in finding that she knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived counsel in

violation of her right to counsel and due process because there was neither an express nor

an implied waiver of counsel. In support of her point, Defendant points to the transcript

which shows no indication that she wanted to represent herself and no indication that she

signed a waiver of counsel. The trial court indicated that it would allow Defendant’s

2

attorney to withdraw shortly before trial,

1 but if Defendant were unable to hire counsel

she would have to represent herself. When she was unable to obtain counsel, the trial

court did not inquire into her indigency2 and failed to conduct a Faretta hearing.3 The

State concedes that the trial court did not adequately establish that Defendant knowingly,

voluntarily and intelligently waived her right to counsel.

Defendant’s point is granted; the judgment is reversed and the case is remanded

for a new trial.