Nagi v. People

JUSTICE MÁRQUEZ,

dissenting.

¶ 18 Three times, the trial court explained on the record why it suspended the proceedings and ordered Mr. Nagi to undergo a competency evaluation: because Nagi wanted to represent himself in a case that could result in an indeterminate life sentence. Nagi’s choice to proceed pro se may well have appeared unwise. But his desire to exercise his constitutional right of self-representation cannot, without more, constitute the statutorily required “reason to believe” that a defendant is “incompetent to proceed” such that a court may suspend proceedings and order a…