1999, pet. ref’d) (finding waiver when the defendant "stated that he was satisfied with his counsel and wanted to be represented by him and that he no longer wanted to represent himself”); Benjamin v. State, No. 06-98-00044-CR, 1999 WL 363534, at ⅜2 (Tex. App.-Texarkana June 8, 1999, pet. ref'd) (not designated for publication) (finding waiver when the defendant "affirmatively withdrew the motion” for self-representation by stating, "I’m withdrawing it”). 83 . 367 S,W.3d at 865. 84 . 753 F.2d 1295, 1299 (4th Cir.), cert, denied, 471 U.S. 1107, 105 S.Ct. 2342, 85 L.Ed.2d 857 (1985). 85 . Id.) See also Bartlett, 44 F.3d at 100-02; Funderburg, 717 S.W.2d at 642; Anderson, 2007 WL 1470275, at *4; Wiggins, 782 S.E.2d at 35; Benjamin, 1999 WL 363534, at *2; Moore, 531 F.3d at 403-04 (<HOLDING>). 86 . Maynard v. Meachum, 545 F.2d 273, 278
holding that a pro se defendant is not held to a different or more lenient standard merely because he elected to proceed pro se one who knowingly elects to represent himself assumes full responsibility for complying with the substantive and procedural requirements of the law holding that a defendant has a right to proceed pro se at trial holding no presumption of acquiescence because defendant was never allowed to proceed pro se holding defendants pro se motion to reduce sentence was not properly before the trial court when defendant was represented by counsel since defendant may not proceed both by counsel and pro se holding that no presumption of acquiescence attached when the defendant permitted his attorney to call the next witnesses because it would be wholly unreasonable to require the defendant in order to preserve his requests to proceed pro se to refuse the trial courts orders to continue with the trial