This Court recognize s that the right to counsel is "necessary to
insure fundamental human rights of life and liberty. " Johnson v. Zerbst ,
304 U.S. 458, 462 (1938) . It also recognize s that the Sixth Amendment
includes a right to self -representation. Faretta v. California , 422 U.S.
806, 819 –820 (1975) . It has not outlined baseline requirements for
standby representation , nor hast it established a standard to evaluat e
attorney effectiveness when standby counsel is forced into a case with
inadequate preparation time. Therefore, t he question s presented are:

(1) If a court utilizes standby counsel, does the Sixth Amendment
require that the court give standby counsel adequate time to
prepar e so they may try the case, if needed?

(2) Does a court violate the Sixth Amendment when it replaces
standby counsel and forces replacement standby counsel to take
over the representation without adequate time to prepar e?

Whether the Sixth Amendment requires courts to provide standby counsel with adequate preparation time to try a case if needed, and whether courts violate the Sixth Amendment by replacing standby counsel and forcing replacement counsel to assume representation without adequate preparation time