(a-1) The attorney for the state in a criminal case may not:
(1) initiate or encourage an attempt to obtain from an unrepresented defendant a waiver of the right to counsel; or
(2) communicate with a defendant who has requested the appointment of counsel unless the court or the court's designee authorized under Article 26.04 to appoint counsel for indigent defendants in the county has denied the request.
(a-2) The court may not direct or encourage the defendant to communicate with the attorney for the state until the court advises the defendant of the right to counsel and the procedure for obtaining counsel and the defendant has been given a reasonable opportunity to obtain counsel. If the defendant has requested appointed counsel, the court may not direct or encourage the defendant to communicate with the attorney for the state unless the court or the court's designee authorized under Article 26.04 to appoint counsel for indigent defendants in the county has denied the request.
(f) A defendant may voluntarily and intelligently waive in writing the right to counsel. A waiver obtained in violation of
Subsection (a-1) or (a-2) is presumed invalid.
(g) If a defendant wishes to waive his right to counsel, whether for purposes of entering a guilty plea or proceeding to trial, the court shall advise him of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation. If the court determines that the waiver is voluntarily and intelligently made, the court shall provide the defendant with a statement substantially in the following form, which, if signed by the defendant, shall be filed with and become part of the record of proceedings:
"I have been advised this ______ day of __________, [19] 20 , by the (name of court) Court of my right to representation by counsel in the case [trial of the charge] pending against me. I have been further advised that if I am unable to afford counsel, one will be appointed for me free of charge. Understanding my right to have counsel if I am not financially able to employ counsel, I wish to waive that right and request the court to proceed with my case without an attorney being appointed for me. I hereby waive my right to counsel. (signature of defendant)"

So, does this mean in any criminal case, you can't initiate any conversation with any defendant until the Court instructs the defendant of the right to an attorney. Because I'm reading it to say I can't negotiate any misdemeanor cases without the defendant formally appearing in court and spending more court time in a case where they want to plea.

Yes, that's basically what it requires.

Seems you mean ol' prosecutors have been pleading out defendants without allowing defense attorneys to ding the county for a couple hundred bucks before getting their client the exact same deal you offered beforehand. Shame on you!

I can see the cattle call now on misd. court day with 40-50 defendants present in the courtroom prior to me talking to those who are unrepresented: The judge reading a script to the masses and asking those who want to talk to the Atty for the state to come forward and sign the waiver that almost minics the waiver they have to acknowlege in open court before a plea and sign and swear to in front of the judge. Then the jugde instructing all who signed go go back to the County Attorney's office, and those who don't to now come forward and either notify the court of their plans for retaining an atty or filing out paperwork for court appointed lawyers; which they already had the opportunity to to at the jail upon arrest.
Then, as is my(or was) my practice, I always advise the defendants of their right to counsel when they are in my office, prior to letting them say anything.....maybe now I can skip that step! So much for trying to do the right thing withuot a legislative mandate.
Soungs like redundancy to me!
Oh yeah, then do it over again at the actual plea!
Looks like another "opportunity" for another TDCAA publication complete with scripts and forms and a needle for the finger prick so we can get the signatures in blood to make the whole deal legit and binding!
Last question....does this apply to class c offenses even though no appointment is available?

Yep. That's what I was leading up to. The practical effect of this bill may be that pro se representation in traffic court is greatly inhibited. Thereby encouraging the ticket lawyers businesses to swell.

How will this legislation impact our ability to question unrepresented suspects who agree to appear and testify before a Grand Jury without counsel?

I can see this having both good and bad impacts. We have a misdemeanor court here, and let me go on the record as stating that I have ABSOLUTELY no problem with the attorneys or the judge, and find both VERY FAIR, but if they can't resolve the case by talking to the prosecutor, then they can be appointed counsel.

I have talked to a few persons, and not that I always believe my clients, but who have told of defenses which I would have tried the case for. I just do not think that a person should be allowed to plead to a conviction (as opposed to deferred) without the advice and consent of learned counsel (of course 'learned' probably leaves me out). The attorney for the state is under no duty, nor pressure to tell the client that his case is weak, or that the victim is known to have multiple cases pending, etc... If all the state offerred was deferred, I'd have no problem with pro se pleas, but a plea to a conviction should be monitored by someone who zealously advocates for the defense.

Well, and in my history of writing too much on these, I will say that the defendant's side isn't always taken into account by the prosecutor up front. I had a providing alcohol to a minor case. On paper, it sounded great, but my client had a story to tell, and as usual, it sounded nothing like the officer's/deputy's. The information was set aside, and I campaigned long and hard (getting affidavits from responsible people). The net effect, the deputy could not substantiate what he alleged in his reports, and my client was most likely arrested for opening her mouth. The average person doesn't know what to do, or how to do it, or what to tell the prosecutor to shake their case. All pleas to a conviction should be monitored by counsel, especially counsel who can tell the defendant the long range implications of a conviction (the state is not obligated to do so).

With that said, as long as it's deferred, and they understand, in writing, the consequences of deferred, I have no problem with MISDEMEANOR pro se pleas, as they are vital, and economical, in the justice system.