18 Wyoming opinions name it 1 courts 1975–2023 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Wyoming 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Van Riper v. Stategreen2 sentences2012However, for a defendant's decision to proceed pro se to be valid, the trial judge must ensure that the waiver of counsel is "an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege." Van Riper v. State, 882 P.2d 230, 234 (Wyo.1994), quoting Willie, 941 F.2d at 1388 . 1998A criminal defendant may waive his right to counsel so long as the district court ensures that it is “ ‘an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege.’ ” Van Riper v. State, 882 P.2d 230, 234 (Wyo.1994) (quoting United States v. Willie, 941 F.2d 1384,1388 (10th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1106 , 112 S.Ct. 1200 , 117 L.Ed.2d 440 (1992)). | 7 | 7 |
Johnson v. Zerbstgreen2 sentences2012However, to be valid, the trial judge must ensure that the waiver of counsel is "an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege." United States v. McConnell, 749 F.2d 1441, 1450-51 (10th Cir.1984) (quoting Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 464 , 58 S.Ct. 1019, 1023 , 82 L.Ed. 1461 (1938)). 2012However, to be valid, the trial judge must ensure that the waiver of counsel is "an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege." United States v. McConnell, 749 F.2d 1441, 1450-51 (10th Cir.1984) (quoting Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 464 , 58 S.Ct. 1019, 1023 , 82 L.Ed. 1461 (1938)). | 3 | 9 |
United States v. James H. McConnell and Raymond H. Starnsgreen2 sentences2012However, to be valid, the trial judge must ensure that the waiver of counsel is "an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege." United States v. McConnell, 749 F.2d 1441, 1450-51 (10th Cir.1984) (quoting Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 464 , 58 S.Ct. 1019, 1023 , 82 L.Ed. 1461 (1938)). 2000However, to be valid, the trial judge must ensure that the waiver of counsel is "an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege." - United States v. McConnell, 749 F.2d 1441, 1450-51 (10th Cir.1984) (quoting Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 464 , 58 S.Ct. 1019, 1023 , 82 L.Ed. 1461 (1938)). | 3 | 3 |
Nelson v. Stategreen2 sentences2004Nelson v. State, 934 P.2d 1238, 1241 (Wyo.1997) (quoting Van Riper v. State, 882 P.2d 230, 234 (Wyo.1994)). 2002Nelson v. State, 934 P.2d 1238, 1241 (Wyo.1997) ( quoting Van Riper v. State, 882 P.2d 230, 234 (Wyo.1994)). | 3 | 3 |
United States v. Wesley Williegreen2 sentences2014"A criminal defendant may waive his right to counsel so long as the . court ensures that it is 'an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege.'" Vargas v. State, 963 P.2d 984, 989-90 (Wyo.1998) (quoting United States v. Willie, 941 F.2d 1384, 1388 (10th Cir.1991)). [118] During the plea hearing, Mr. Derrera exercised his Sixth Amendment right to represent himself, waiving his right to counsel. 2012However, for a defendant's decision to proceed pro se to be valid, the trial judge must ensure that the waiver of counsel is "an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege." Van Riper v. State, 882 P.2d 230, 234 (Wyo.1994), quoting Willie, 941 F.2d at 1388 . | 2 | 3 |
Adam Christopher Mackley v. The State of Wyominggreen2 sentences2023See Mackley v. State, 2021 WY 33 , ¶¶ 12–16, 481 P.3d 639 , 642–43 (Wyo. 2021) (finding the defendant intentionally relinquished a known right when defense counsel twice affirmatively endorsed an incorrect jury instruction and declined the opportunity to correct it). 2023See Mackley v. State, 2021 WY 33 , ¶¶ 12–16, 481 P.3d 639 , 642–43 (Wyo. 2021) (finding the defendant intentionally relinquished a known right when defense counsel twice affirmatively endorsed an incorrect jury instruction and declined the opportunity to correct it). | 1 | 1 |
Vargas v. Stategreen1 sentence2014"A criminal defendant may waive his right to counsel so long as the . court ensures that it is 'an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege.'" Vargas v. State, 963 P.2d 984, 989-90 (Wyo.1998) (quoting United States v. Willie, 941 F.2d 1384, 1388 (10th Cir.1991)). [118] During the plea hearing, Mr. Derrera exercised his Sixth Amendment right to represent himself, waiving his right to counsel. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wyoming. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Broome v. Georgia
green
2 sentences1998A criminal defendant may waive his right to counsel so long as the district court ensures that it is "`an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege.'" Van Riper v. State, 882 P.2d *990 230, 234 (Wyo.1994) ( quoting United States v. Willie, 941 F.2d 1384, 1388 (10th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1106 , 112 S.Ct. 1200 , 117 L.Ed.2d 440 (1992)). 1998A criminal defendant may waive his right to counsel so long as the district court ensures that it is “ ‘an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege.’ ” Van Riper v. State, 882 P.2d 230, 234 (Wyo.1994) (quoting United States v. Willie, 941 F.2d 1384,1388 (10th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1106 , 112 S.Ct. 1200 , 117 L.Ed.2d 440 (1992)). | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Taylor v. Domovich
green
2 sentences1998A criminal defendant may waive his right to counsel so long as the district court ensures that it is "`an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege.'" Van Riper v. State, 882 P.2d *990 230, 234 (Wyo.1994) ( quoting United States v. Willie, 941 F.2d 1384, 1388 (10th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1106 , 112 S.Ct. 1200 , 117 L.Ed.2d 440 (1992)). 1998A criminal defendant may waive his right to counsel so long as the district court ensures that it is “ ‘an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege.’ ” Van Riper v. State, 882 P.2d 230, 234 (Wyo.1994) (quoting United States v. Willie, 941 F.2d 1384,1388 (10th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1106 , 112 S.Ct. 1200 , 117 L.Ed.2d 440 (1992)). | 1 | 1998–1998 |
United States v. Broce
green
2 sentences1992Broce, 488 U.S. at 573 , 109 S.Ct. at 764 stated: "Our decisions have not suggested that conscious waiver is necessary with respect to each potential defense relinquished by a plea of guilty. 1992Broce, 488 U.S. at 573 , 109 S.Ct. at 764 stated: "Our decisions have not suggested that conscious waiver is necessary with respect to each potential defense relinquished by a plea of guilty. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
United States v. John W. Hinckley, Jr. United States of America v. John W. Hinckley, Jr
green
2 sentences1982In Edwards v. Arizona, supra, 451 U.S. at 482 , 101 S.Ct. at 1883 , the Court stated the rule as follows: “It is reasonably clear under our cases that waivers of counsel must not only be voluntary, but must also constitute a knowing and intelligent relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege, a matter which depends in each case ‘upon the particular facts and circumstances surrounding that case, including the background, experience, and conduct of the accused.’ Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 464 [ 58 S.Ct. 1019, 1023 , 82 L.Ed.2d 1461 , 1466] (1938).” See also: U. S. v. Hinckl 1982Cir., 672 F.2d 115 . | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Edwards v. Arizona
green
2 sentences1982In Edwards v. Arizona, supra, 451 U.S. at 482 , 101 S.Ct. at 1883 , the Court stated the rule as follows: "It is reasonably clear under our cases that waivers of counsel must not only be voluntary, but must also constitute a knowing and intelligent relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege, a matter which depends in each case `upon the particular facts and circumstances surrounding that case, including the background, experience, and conduct of the accused.' Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 464 [ 58 S.Ct. 1019, 1023 , 82 L.Ed.2d 1461 , 1466] (1938)." See also: U.S. v. Hinckle 1982In Edwards v. Arizona, supra, 451 U.S. at 482 , 101 S.Ct. at 1883 , the Court stated the rule as follows: "It is reasonably clear under our cases that waivers of counsel must not only be voluntary, but must also constitute a knowing and intelligent relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege, a matter which depends in each case `upon the particular facts and circumstances surrounding that case, including the background, experience, and conduct of the accused.' Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 464 [ 58 S.Ct. 1019, 1023 , 82 L.Ed.2d 1461 , 1466] (1938)." See also: U.S. v. Hinckle | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Fay v. Noia
red
2 sentences1975But, as pointed out in Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391, 439 , 83 S.Ct. 822 , 9 L.Ed.2d 837 (1963), citing Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 , 58 S.Ct. 1019 , 82 L.Ed. 1461 (1938), waiver is an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege. 1975But, as pointed out in Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391, 439 , 83 S.Ct. 822 , 9 L.Ed.2d 837 (1963), citing Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 , 58 S.Ct. 1019 , 82 L.Ed. 1461 (1938), waiver is an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege. | 1 | 1975–1975 |
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.
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.