Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A Marsden motion is the only means by which a criminal defendant can fire a court-appointed attorney or communicate directly with a judge in a California state court. [1] It is based on a defendant's claim that the attorney is providing ineffective assistance or has a conflict with the defendant.
Beard, the Supreme Court faulted the defendant's lawyer for not reviewing a file that the attorney knew would be used by the prosecution in the sentencing phase of the trial. [17] In Glover v. United States, a lawyer was held to be ineffective when he failed to object to the judge's miscalculation of the defendant's sentence. [18] In Hinton v.
As stated in Brewer v.Williams, 430 U.S. 387 (1977), the right to counsel "means at least that a person is entitled to the help of a lawyer at or after the time that judicial proceedings have been initiated against him, 'whether by way of formal charge, preliminary hearing, indictment, information, or arraignment. ' " [2] Brewer goes on to conclude that once adversarial proceedings have begun ...
Iowa has one of the most aggressive court systems in the country when it comes to billing defendants for court-appointed attorneys, even in cases where they're acquitted or charges are dropped.
‘I cannot and will not allow these attorneys to represent you,’ the judge told Richard Allen, amid the scandal over leaked crime scene photos Delphi murders judge blocks attorneys in dramatic ...
The court, it seems, has no problem openly worrying about how its rulings are publicly perceived when it wants to. The absence of such a concern in the January 6 obstruction case is thus telling.
Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that criminal defendants have a constitutional right to refuse counsel and represent themselves in state criminal proceedings.
A New York appeals court grilled attorneys for both Donald Trump and the New York attorney general’s office Thursday over the $454 million civil fraud judgment against the former president ...