Key legal question
Whether the appeal against the refusal to replace appointed defense counsel satisfies the statutory pleading requirements.
Extracted holding
The appeal did not meet the mandatory reasoning requirements because it failed to explain why the challenged order was unlawful or unconstitutional.
Extracted reasoning
The appellant was expressly informed of the formal requirements and did not respond; his filing also contained no substantiated challenge within the meaning of Art. 42(2) BGG and Art. 106 BGG.