Ad
related to: right to represent template
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Court's opinion went on to hold that criminal defendants, in state courts, have a constitutional right to refuse counsel and represent themselves. However, the right to represent oneself is not absolute. Courts have the authority and duty to determine whether a particular individual is capable of representing himself or herself. In Godinez 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 ...
"Every person within this state ought to find a certain remedy, by having recourse to the laws, for all injuries or wrongs which may be received in one's person, property or character. Every person ought to obtain right and justice freely, and without purchase, completely, and without denial; promptly and without delay; conformably to the laws ...
In criminal law, the right to counsel means a defendant has a legal right to have the assistance of counsel (i.e., lawyers) and, if the defendant cannot afford a lawyer, requires that the government appoint one or pay the defendant's legal expenses. The right to counsel is generally regarded as a constituent of the right to a fair trial ...
Power of attorney. A power of attorney (POA) or letter of attorney is a written authorization to represent or act on another's behalf in private affairs (which may be financial or regarding health and welfare), business, or some other legal matter.
The Court had recognized these two rights on competency for some time. In Dusky v.United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960), and in Drope v. Missouri, 420 U.S. 162 (1975), the Court established the standard for competency to stand trial—the defendant must have a "rational and factual understanding" of the nature of the proceedings, and must be able to rationally assist his lawyer in defending him.
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.
Rock elevated the right to testify in criminal trials to a constitutional right, but the debate over whether such a right ought to exist did not begin there. Prior to Rock, statutes and courts had recognized rights to represent oneself in a court of law. In Faretta v.