Does a defendant have a right to counsel at a resentencing proceeding where the entire sentencing package has been set aside?

Federal courts have held that there is no right to counsel (and thus no right to self-representation) at a resentencing proceeding where the trial court's only duty is to perform a " 'ministerial act.' " (Hall v. Moore (11th Cir. 2001) 253 F.3d 624, 627; see also Jackson v. Miller (7th Cir. 2001) 260 F.3d 769, 776 [no right to counsel where subsequent proceeding is a " 'mere formality' "], quoting Mempa, supra, 389 U.S. at p. 135.) However, a defendant does have a Sixth Amendment right to counsel at a resentencing proceeding if, due to a successful appeal or post-sentencing motion, "the

Page 6

entire sentencing package was set aside" and the trial court has "the discretion to 'reconstruct the sentence.' [Citation.]" (Hall v. Moore, supra, at p. 628.)

At a resentencing involving the "entire sentencing package," the right to counsel is necessary to ensure that "the defendant has an opportunity to challenge the accuracy of information the sentencing judge may rely on, to argue about its reliability and the weight the information should be given, and to present any evidence in mitigation he [or she] may have. [Citations.]" (United States v. Jackson (11th Cir. 1991) 923 F.2d 1494, 1496-1497.) But where the trial court must impose a lower sentence after a successful post-sentencing motion or appeal, "this necessary process has already occurred. . . . In constitutional terms, a remedial sentence reduction is not a critical stage of the proceedings . . . ." (Ibid.)