IN FARETTA, THE COURT RULED THAT THE DEFENDANT'S RIGHTS TO EFFECTIVE COUNSEL AND SELF-REPRESENTATION WERE SUBORDINATE TO THE RIGHT TO MAKE A FREE CHOICE FOLLOWING A KNOWING AND INTELLIGENT WAIVER OF COUNSEL. THIS ARTICLE ANALYZES THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF SELF-REPRESENTATION IN THE US, THE OPINIONS IN FARETTA, AND PROCEDURAL RAMIFICATIONS OF THE RIGHT TO SELF-REPRESENTATION. THE QUESTION OF RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF THE RULING IS ALSO EXPLORED. THE AUTHOR CONCLUDES THAT, DUE TO THE COURT'S FAILURE TO DEFINE THE LIMITS OF THE PRO SE RIGHT AND TO ARTICULATE PROCEDURAL STANDARDS FOR ITS EXERCISE, LOWER COURT DECISIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS OF FARETTA WILL HAVE TO BE RELIED ON UNTIL THE SUPREME COURT ADDRESSES THE RIGHT TO SELF-REPRESENTATION AGAIN.