Rachael Lynn Boehme v. Oregon

When trial court would neither agree to relieve defense counsel, even after he took positions that were plainly adverse to his client, nor permit the defendant to proceed pro se, does this constitute reversible error? When court appointed counsel has intentionally failed to act as accused’s “compulsory process for obtaining and presenting witnesses and evidence in her favor” and the court has denied substitution of counsel, is she entitled to act in pro se? Does a trial court err by failing to conduct a meaningful colloquy about defendant's request to represent herself in the face of what the state admits was ineffective assistance of counsel, and then by denying defendant's motion to proceed pro se, without conducting a proper inquiry, does this constitute reversible error?