"He who represents himself has a fool for a client," said Abraham Lincoln.
Despite the wisdom of the 16th president, representing oneself – "pro se" – is growing in popularity in American courtrooms.
Pro se legal apportionment derives from Latin, meaning "acting on behalf of themselves." A person with pro se legal participation is someone advocating for themselves in a court as opposed to being served by an attorney. Pro se may happen in court regardless of whether the person is the offender or plaintiff in a civil case, or if they are the accused in a criminal case.
There are pros and cons behind the legal doctrine, which has been used in America for centuries. Each case presents unique opportunities and challenges, and these should be weighed thoroughly before deciding that "going pro se" is the solution.
The National Center for State Courts' report, "Self-Representation: Pro Se Statistics," points out that many state jurisdictions, as well as courts at the federal level, are seeing a growth in the number of pro se litigants. The report estimates the rate in California to be 67%, 73% in Florida and over 65% in Wisconsin.
In federal courts, roughly 25% of civil actions lodged, 90% of prisoner requests and 10% of non-prisoner pleadings were submitted by claimants choosing to go the pro se route.
The right of a person to represent their cause precedes the adoption of the Constitution in America.
In Faretta v. California, America's Supreme Court ruled that defendants have the constitutional liberty to refuse counsel in state proceedings. However, the right to self-represent is not complete: The court always maintains the moral duty to decide if a person is competent for self-representation.
The majority of states have a provision in the state constitution, which either expressly permits self-representation or outlines instances in which the procedure is not appropriate.
Pro se representation offers unique but not insurmountable challenges for the legal system. In 2000, 7% of writs in civil cases that were submitted to courts in Louisiana were granted, compared to 47% when presented by counsel. In criminal cases, the ratio was narrower: 35% of pro se writs were allowed as compared to 44% of those submitted by counsel.
Erica J. Hashimoto, a professor at the Georgia School of Law, conducted a study in which she found that pro se defendants fared better than their represented counterparts. Hashimoto reviewed 235 cases. Of those, 50% were convicted; of an almost equal number of cases in which the defendants represented themselves, 26% of the pro se defendants would end up with felony convictions.
Self-representation is common in civil cases. For example:
There are some cases that stand out for pro se plaintiffs:
The ability of an individual to appear in court without a lawyer when litigating or advocating a civil action is decided by state law. Even then it varies, subject to the court's ruling.