IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR LEE COUNTY FLORIDA

STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 16-000275CF

Plaintiff,

vs.

RANDAL ROSADO

Defendant.
__________________________/

REQUEST FOR FARETTA HEARING
COMES NOW, Defendant, Randal Rosado, to assert his right of self-representation and request a competency hearing to wave his right to counsel pursuant to Faretta v California, 422 U.S. 809, 95 S. Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed. 2d 562 (1975).
1. The Defendant has addressed the irreconcilable differences existing between him and his court-appointed counsel, Sebouh Gourian, with the Court for many months. Defendant previously had a Nelson Hearing heard by this court on August 14th and 15th of 2017 to address the ineffectiveness of his counsel and to identify a conflict of interest existing between Defendant’s counsel, Sebouh Gourjian, and codefendant’s counsel, Steven Smith pursuant to 27.5303. Judge Steinbeck denied the request for change of counsel despite the obvious “affiliation” between the two attorneys under 27.5303.
2. The Court had a follow-up Faretta Hearing at the Defendant’s request on August 15, 2017, and Judge Steinbeck persuaded the Defendant against self-representation due to his poverty and lack of resources to take depositions, to subpoena witnesses for testimony, and his inability to communicate directly with the state attorney’s office regarding offers or other aspects of the case. Defendant was also advised by this trial judge that Sebouh Groujian would be the attorney appointed to him should he decide to seek the assistance of counsel at a later time, essentially forcing the Defendant to use an attorney that he has an ongoing conflict, hostility, and differences with. Due to this denial of resources and diminished ability to defend himself, the Defendant decided to remain represented by Attorney Gourjian, expecting him to communicate with the state on his behalf, which has never occurred.
3. As reflected on Court record, Judge Steinbeck has made it clear that the Defendant will not receive equal treatment as an indigent. “When a state brings its judicial power to bear on an indigent defendant in a criminal proceeding it must take steps to assure that the defendant has a fair opportunity to present his defense…justice cannot be equal where, simply as a result of his poverty, a defendant is denied the opportunity to participate meaningfully in a judicial proceeding when his liberty is at stake.” Ake v Oklahoma, 470 US 68, 105 S Ct. 1087, 84, L. Ed 2d 53 USLW 4179 (1985).
4. As a result of Attorney Gourjian’s continued ineffectiveness through his refusal to file important pretrial motions and to obtain victim testimony through depositions and trial testimony, Defendant wishes to assert his right to self-representation.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished to the Clerk of Court at 1700 Monroe Street, Fort Myers, Florida 33901 and the Office of the State Attorney, 2000 Main Street, 6th Floor, Fort Myers, Florida 33902 on this 22 day of December, 2017.
By:/s/ Randal Rosado
Defendant
2501 Ortiz Avenue
Fort Myers, Florida 33905