post-trial hearing in District of Columbia

26 District of Columbia opinions name it 1 courts 1978–2015 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by District of Columbia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (28)

Case	Followed	Cited
United States v. Bill McNealgreen ca6 · 1992 · cited in 2 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009 2 sentences 2009“Any ‘factual finding anchored in credibility assessments derived from personal observations of the witnesses is beyond appellate reversal unless those factual findings are clearly erroneous.’ ” Hill v. United States, 664 A.2d 347 , 353 n. 10 (D.C.1995) (quoting United States v. McNeal, 955 F.2d 1067, 1072 (6th Cir.1992)). 2009"Any `factual finding anchored in credibility assessments derived from personal observations of the witnesses is beyond appellate reversal unless those factual findings are clearly erroneous.'" Hill v. United States, 664 A.2d 347 , 353 n. 10 (D.C.1995) (quoting United States v. McNeal, 955 F.2d 1067, 1072 (6th Cir.1992)).	2	2
Angarano v. United Statesgreen dc · 1973 · cited in 3 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1978–1980 2 sentences 1978NOTES [1] Where the issue presented is a post-trial claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, the test we have adopted is that of Angarano v. United States, D.C.App., 312 A.2d 295 (1973), rehearing en banc denied, 329 A.2d 453 (1974), relying on Bruce v. United States, 126 U.S.App. 1978Where the issue presented is a post-trial claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, the test we have adopted is that of Angarano v. United States, D.C.App., 312 A.2d 295 (1973), rehearing en banc denied, 329 A.2d 453 (1974), relying on Bruce v. United States, 126 U.S.App.D.C. 336 , 379 F.2d 113 (1967).	1	3
Angarano v. United Statesgreen dc · 1974 · cited in 3 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1978–1980 2 sentences 1978NOTES [1] Where the issue presented is a post-trial claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, the test we have adopted is that of Angarano v. United States, D.C.App., 312 A.2d 295 (1973), rehearing en banc denied, 329 A.2d 453 (1974), relying on Bruce v. United States, 126 U.S.App. 1978Where the issue presented is a post-trial claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, the test we have adopted is that of Angarano v. United States, D.C.App., 312 A.2d 295 (1973), rehearing en banc denied, 329 A.2d 453 (1974), relying on Bruce v. United States, 126 U.S.App.D.C. 336 , 379 F.2d 113 (1967).	1	3
Smith v. Phillipsgreen scotus · 1982 · cited in 2 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1982–1989 2 sentences 1989In Smith v. Phillips, supra, 455 U.S. at 218 n. 8, 102 S.Ct. at 946 n. 8, the Supreme Court noted that a post-trial hearing would be sufficient to cure the error of failing to hold a proper hearing to determine whether to seat an alternate juror during trial, assuming, arguendo, that such a hearing was necessary. 1989In Smith v. Phillips, supra, 455 U.S. at 218 n. 8, 102 S.Ct. at 946 n. 8, the Supreme Court noted that a post-trial hearing would be sufficient to cure the error of failing to hold a proper hearing to determine whether to seat an alternate juror during trial, assuming, arguendo, that such a hearing was necessary.	1	2
Smith v. United Statesgreen dc · 2002 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015 2 sentences 2015Our first task.is to determine the correct standard of review of this issue on appeal. “[P]lain error review- applies to a claim that an indictment has been constructively amended if an objection has not been made at trial level.” (Alexander) Smith v. United States, 801 A.2d 958, 962 (D.C.2002). 2015Our first task is to determine the correct standard of review of this issue on appeal. ―[P]lain error review applies to a claim that an indictment has been 167 constructively amended if an objection has not been made at trial level.‖ (Alexander) Smith v. United States, 801 A.2d 958, 962 (D.C. 2002).	1	1
United States v. Fernando Leonzogreen cadc · 1995 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012 2 sentences 2012Because this is so, we should say as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit did in EEOC v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.: where a party “simply chose for tactical reasons, of its own accord, not to pursue grounds, for relief that it had[,] ... we cannot remand.” 925 F.2d 619, 628 (3d Cir.1991); accord, e.g., Leonzo, supra, 311 U.S.App.D.C. at 136 , 50 F.3d at 1088 ; Thompson, supra, 710 F.2d at 1503-05 . 2012Because this is so, we should say as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit did in EEOC v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.: where a party “simply chose for tactical reasons, of its own accord, not to pursue grounds, for relief that it had[,] ... we cannot remand.” 925 F.2d 619, 628 (3d Cir.1991); accord, e.g., Leonzo, supra, 311 U.S.App.D.C. at 136 , 50 F.3d at 1088 ; Thompson, supra, 710 F.2d at 1503-05 .	1	1
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Westinghouse Electric Corporationgreen ca3 · 1991 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012 1 sentence 2012Because this is so, we should say as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit did in EEOC v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.: where a party “simply chose for tactical reasons, of its own accord, not to pursue grounds, for relief that it had[,] ... we cannot remand.” 925 F.2d 619, 628 (3d Cir.1991); accord, e.g., Leonzo, supra, 311 U.S.App.D.C. at 136 , 50 F.3d at 1088 ; Thompson, supra, 710 F.2d at 1503-05 .	1	1
Porter v. United Statesgreen dc · 2003 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008So even when I said that, I didn’t lock us into having to put on evidence at all.” The prosecutor’s closing remarks did not have the “potential to leave the jury with the impression that the defendants, who had presented no defense witnesses, were expected to provide proof of innocence,” akin to the prosecutor’s remark we disapproved in Porter that “[e]very defendant is entitled to [ ] the strongest defense possible.” Porter v. United States, 826 A.2d 398, 407-08 (D.C.2003).	1	1
Allison v. United Statesgreen dc · 1982 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997 1 sentence 1997After such a hearing, the trial court must strike a juror it determines cannot “lay aside his impression or opinion and render a verdict based on the evidence presented in court.” Allison v. United States, 451 A.2d 877, 879 (D.C.1982) (internal citation omitted).	1	1
United States v. Eddie Edwardsgreen ca9 · 1990 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1991–1991 2 sentences 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant's failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney "I testify," after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant’s failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney “I testify,” after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec	1	1
LaVigne v. Stategreen alaskactapp · 1990 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1991–1991 2 sentences 1991See LaVigne v. Alaska, supra, 788 P.2d at 55 . 1991See LaVigne v. Alaska, supra, 788 P.2d at 55 .	1	1
Marvins Credit, Inc. v. Stewardgreen dc · 1957 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1989–1989 1 sentence 1989Cowden, supra, 423 A.2d at 938 ; Marvins Credit, Inc. v. Steward, 133 A.2d 473, 476 (D.C.1957). 3 Where it is alleged after trial *331 that a juror failed to answer a question correctly on voir dire, the court may therefore properly uphold the verdict or order a new trial upon concluding a post-trial hearing to evaluate the materiality of the undisclosed information and the truthfulness of the juror’s voir dire answers.	1	1
United States v. Thomas W. Moore, Jr.green cadc · 1976 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1989–1989	1	1
Smith v. Interstate General Corp.green dc · 1983 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1986–1986	1	1
Temple v. Thomas D. Walsh, Inc.green dc · 1984 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1986–1986	1	1
United States v. Boldengreen dc · 1977 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1982–1982	1	1
United States v. Edwin Morrow Curriegreen ca6 · 1979 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1982–1982	1	1
Smith v. United Statesgreen dc · 1974 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1982–1982	1	1
Villacres v. United Statesgreen dc · 1976 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1982–1982	1	1
Henry Daniels, Jr. v. United Statesgreen cadc · 1966 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1982–1982	1	1
Tyrone Gaither v. United States of America, Charles Tatum v. United Statesgreen cadc · 1969 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1982–1982	1	1
Johnson v. United Statesgreen dc · 1978 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1982–1982	1	1
Jeffries v. United Statesgreen scotus · 1974 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1982–1982	1	1
Simpson v. Simpsongreen scotus · 1974 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1982–1982	1	1
Jenkins v. United Statesgreen dc · 1977 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1982–1982	1	1
Carpenter v. United Statesgreen cadc · 1938 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1982–1982	1	1
McNair v. Johnsongreen sc · 1913 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1982–1982	1	1
Arizona v. Washingtongreen scotus · 1978 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 1978–1978	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in District of Columbia. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (33)

Case	Cited	Years
Strickland v. Washington green scotus · 1984 2 sentences 2006The standard for assessing a post-trial claim of ineffective assistance of counsel has been set forth in myriad cases in this and other courts, most notably Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). 2006The standard for assessing a post-trial claim of ineffective assistance of counsel has been set forth in myriad cases in this and other courts, most notably Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).	3	1986–2006
Monroe v. United States green dc · 1978 2 sentences 1992Monroe “rejected] the argument advanced by the government that we should apply the post trial test [of outcome prejudice] in evaluating the prejudicial impact of error on the disposition of pretrial claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.” Monroe, 389 A.2d at 821 . 1983Monroe v. United States, D.C.App., 389 A.2d 811, 817 , cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1006 , 99 S.Ct. 621 , 58 L.Ed.2d 683 (1978).	3	1978–1992
Hill v. United States green dc · 1995 2 sentences 2009“Any ‘factual finding anchored in credibility assessments derived from personal observations of the witnesses is beyond appellate reversal unless those factual findings are clearly erroneous.’ ” Hill v. United States, 664 A.2d 347 , 353 n. 10 (D.C.1995) (quoting United States v. McNeal, 955 F.2d 1067, 1072 (6th Cir.1992)). 2009"Any `factual finding anchored in credibility assessments derived from personal observations of the witnesses is beyond appellate reversal unless those factual findings are clearly erroneous.'" Hill v. United States, 664 A.2d 347 , 353 n. 10 (D.C.1995) (quoting United States v. McNeal, 955 F.2d 1067, 1072 (6th Cir.1992)).	2	2009–2009
United States v. John Thompson, Steven Barfield, and Kim Williams green ca11 · 1983 1 sentence 2012Because this is so, we should say as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit did in EEOC v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.: where a party “simply chose for tactical reasons, of its own accord, not to pursue grounds, for relief that it had[,] ... we cannot remand.” 925 F.2d 619, 628 (3d Cir.1991); accord, e.g., Leonzo, supra, 311 U.S.App.D.C. at 136 , 50 F.3d at 1088 ; Thompson, supra, 710 F.2d at 1503-05 .	1	2012–2012
Artisst v. United States green dc · 1989 1 sentence 2006In Artisst v. United States, 554 A.2d 327 (D.C.1989), this court held that [wjhere it is alleged after trial that a juror failed to answer a question correctly on voir dire, the court may therefore properly uphold the verdict or order a new trial upon concluding a post-trial hearing to evaluate the materiality of the undisclosed information and the truthfulness of the juror’s voir dire answers....	1	2006–2006
Ramos v. United States green dc · 1990 2 sentences 1993Peoples Drug Stores, Inc. v. District of Columbia, 470 A.2d 751 , 752 n. 2 (D.C.1983) (en banc). [6] For example, in Ramos v. United States, 569 A.2d 158 (D.C.1990), it was the appellant who did not raise or even suggest until oral argument that his Fifth Amendment right not to testify at a post-trial hearing on behalf of his former co-defendant had been violated. 1993For example, in Ramos v. United States, 569 A.2d 158 (D.C.1990), it was the appellant who did not raise or even suggest until oral argument that his Fifth Amendment right not to testify at a post-trial hearing on behalf of his former co-defendant had been violated.	1	1993–1993
Brady v. Maryland green scotus · 1963 2 sentences 1993Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). 2 . 1993Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). 2 .	1	1993–1993
Peoples Drug Stores, Inc. v. District of Columbia green dc · 1983 1 sentence 1993Peoples Drug Stores, Inc. v. District of Columbia, 470 A.2d 751 , 752 n. 2 (D.C.1983) (en banc). [6] For example, in Ramos v. United States, 569 A.2d 158 (D.C.1990), it was the appellant who did not raise or even suggest until oral argument that his Fifth Amendment right not to testify at a post-trial hearing on behalf of his former co-defendant had been violated.	1	1993–1993
Bass v. United States green dc · 1990 1 sentence 1992The court has since reaffirmed that principle, rejecting the government’s argument “that counsel’s performance at trial may be considered on appeal in assessing whether the trial court’s Monroe-Farrell error was harmless.” Bass v. United States, 580 A.2d 669 , 672 n. 6 (D.C. 1990).	1	1992–1992
People v. Simmons green michctapp · 1985 2 sentences 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant's failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney "I testify," after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant's failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney "I testify," after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec	1	1991–1991
In Re Mecier green vt · 1983 2 sentences 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant's failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney "I testify," after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant's failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney "I testify," after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec	1	1991–1991
State v. Albright green wis · 1980 2 sentences 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant's failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney "I testify," after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant's failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney "I testify," after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec	1	1991–1991
State v. McKinney green kan · 1977 2 sentences 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant's failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney "I testify," after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant's failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney "I testify," after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec	1	1991–1991
State v. Allie green ariz · 1985 2 sentences 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant's failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney "I testify," after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant's failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney "I testify," after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec	1	1991–1991
McAdoo v. United States green dc · 1986 2 sentences 1991As we stated in McAdoo, supra, 515 A.2d at 423 , McAdoo’s counsel at the post trial hearing effectively conceded [that trial counsel’s failure to call the alleged contract killer was reasonable] when he declined the trial court’s invitation to produce this witness at the hearing; counsel acknowledged he “wouldn’t expect a person to come in and admit to” the murder. 1991As we stated in McAdoo, supra, 515 A.2d at 423 , McAdoo’s counsel at the post trial hearing effectively conceded [that trial counsel’s failure to call the alleged contract killer was reasonable] when he declined the trial court’s invitation to produce this witness at the hearing; counsel acknowledged he “wouldn’t expect a person to come in and admit to” the murder.	1	1991–1991
Baun v. Civiletti green scotus · 1980 2 sentences 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant's failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney "I testify," after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant’s failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney “I testify,” after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec	1	1991–1991
Watts v. United States green scotus · 1980 2 sentences 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant's failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney "I testify," after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant’s failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney “I testify,” after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec	1	1991–1991
Thompson v. United States green scotus · 1980 2 sentences 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant's failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney "I testify," after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec 1991See United States v. Edwards, 897 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir.1990) (defendant’s failure to advise judge, notwithstanding statement to attorney “I testify,” after defense counsel decided not to call him, held to effectively waive his right to testify); State v. Allie, 147 Ariz. 320 , 710 P.2d 430 (1985); State v. McKinney, 221 Kan. 691 , 561 P.2d 432 (1977); People v. Simmons, 140 Mich.App. 681 , 364 N.W.2d 783 (1985); In re Mecier, 143 Vt. 23 , 460 A.2d 472 (1983); State v. Albright, 96 Wis.2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (defendant failed to advise judge of desire to testify when attorney said he had dec	1	1991–1991
SHANNON & LUCHS MGT. CO., INC. v. Roberts green dc · 1982	1	1989–1989
Cowden v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority green dc · 1980	1	1989–1989
Stone v. United States green scotus · 1978	1	1983–1983
Monroe v. United States green scotus · 1978	1	1983–1983
United States v. Antonio Gaudino Vargas green ca1 · 1979	1	1982–1982
Reed v. United States green dc · 1978	1	1982–1982
United States v. Dennis W. Mulligan green ca2 · 1978	1	1982–1982
United States v. Hershey Moss green ca8 · 1979	1	1982–1982
In Re United States of America green cadc · 1979	1	1982–1982
Jenkins v. United States green scotus · 1977	1	1982–1982
Giles v. Arkansas green scotus · 1977	1	1982–1982
Shelton v. United States green scotus · 1978	1	1982–1982
Chandler v. Florida green scotus · 1981	1	1982–1982
The Mobley Co. v. McLucas green sc · 1914	1	1982–1982
Arthur Bruce v. United States green cadc · 1967	1	1978–1978

Statutes the citing opinions construe

DC § D.C. Code § 23-110 (12) DC § D.C. Code § 22-2101 (6) DC § D.C. Code § 22-1801 (5) USC § 18u.s.c.3500 (4) DC § D.C. Code § 22-401 (3) DC § D.C. Code § 22-4502 (3) DC § D.C. Code § 22-501 (3) USC § 28u.s.c.2255 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

IL 73 (1973–2025) GA 50 (1977–2026) TX 41 (1982–2025) MS 29 (1991–2023) FL 28 (1966–2021) DC 26 (1978–2015) PA 25 (1967–2026) MO 24 (1981–2025) VA 19 (1989–2025) OH 12 (1990–2021) ID 11 (1989–2023) CA 11 (1971–2025) MT 10 (1990–2018) WV 10 (1983–2026) NY 10 (1969–2012) IA 9 (1985–2026) AL 9 (1989–2013) MI 8 (1977–2021) NJ 7 (1991–2017) HI 7 (1993–2013) KS 7 (1957–2007) MD 6 (1987–2016) SC 6 (1998–2026) MN 6 (1985–2006) OR 6 (1981–2021) WI 6 (1985–2024) LA 5 (1976–2013) IN 5 (1989–2015) WA 5 (1979–2021) TN 4 (1993–2014) DE 4 (1975–2017) KY 4 (1987–2008) AZ 4 (1979–2003) NM 4 (1990–2023) CO 4 (1984–2025) NV 4 (1991–2021) MA 3 (1994–1998) UT 3 (1987–2018) SD 3 (1997–2015) OK 2 (1991–2004) VI 2 (2007–2011) ME 2 (2006–2007) AK 2 (1986–2011) RI 2 (2003–2004)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check

Your account

Appearance