Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
14 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1951–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Indiana 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 |
|---|---|---|
Eaton v. Stategreen2 sentences2019“Waiver of assistance of counsel may be established based upon the particular facts and circumstances surrounding the case, including the background, experience, and conduct of the accused.” Id. [17] “It is well established that there is a strong presumption against the waiver of the right to counsel, and it is the trial court that bears the ‘serious and weighty responsibility to determine whether there was an intelligent and competent waiver.’” Wirthlin v. State, 99 N.E.3d 699, 704 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018) (quoting Eaton v. State, 894 N.E.2d 213, 217 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008)) (emphasis supplied), tra 2019“Waiver of assistance of counsel may be established based upon the particular facts and circumstances surrounding the case, including the background, experience, and conduct of the accused.” Id. [12] “It is well established that there is a strong presumption against the waiver of the right to counsel, and it is the trial court that bears the ‘serious and weighty responsibility to determine whether there was an intelligent and competent waiver.’” Wirthlin v. State, 99 N.E.3d 699, 704 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018) (quoting Eaton v. State, 894 N.E.2d 213, 217 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008)) (emphasis supplied), tra | 2 | 3 |
Stephen Wirthlin v. State of Indianagreen2 sentences2019“Waiver of assistance of counsel may be established based upon the particular facts and circumstances surrounding the case, including the background, experience, and conduct of the accused.” Id. [12] “It is well established that there is a strong presumption against the waiver of the right to counsel, and it is the trial court that bears the ‘serious and weighty responsibility to determine whether there was an intelligent and competent waiver.’” Wirthlin v. State, 99 N.E.3d 699, 704 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018) (quoting Eaton v. State, 894 N.E.2d 213, 217 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008)) (emphasis supplied), tra 2019“Waiver of assistance of counsel may be established based upon the particular facts and circumstances surrounding the case, including the background, experience, and conduct of the accused.” Id. [12] “It is well established that there is a strong presumption against the waiver of the right to counsel, and it is the trial court that bears the ‘serious and weighty responsibility to determine whether there was an intelligent and competent waiver.’” Wirthlin v. State, 99 N.E.3d 699, 704 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018) (quoting Eaton v. State, 894 N.E.2d 213, 217 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008)) (emphasis supplied), tra | 2 | 2 |
Faretta v. Californiagreen2 sentences2019The Court elaborated on the determination of a valid waiver stating that if a defendant chooses to forego the assistance of counsel and to represent herself, "[s]he should be made aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, so that the record will establish that [s]he knows what [s]he is doing and h[er] choice is made with eyes open." Faretta , 422 U.S. at 835 , 95 S.Ct. at 2541 , 45 L.Ed.2d at 581-82 (internal quotes omitted). [13] Our Supreme Court has adopted four factors for a trial court to consider when determining whether a knowing, voluntary and intelligent waiver ha 2019The Court elaborated on the determination of a valid waiver stating that if a defendant chooses to forego the assistance of counsel and to represent herself, "[s]he should be made aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, so that the record will establish that [s]he knows what [s]he is doing and h[er] choice is made with eyes open." Faretta , 422 U.S. at 835 , 95 S.Ct. at 2541 , 45 L.Ed.2d at 581-82 (internal quotes omitted). [13] Our Supreme Court has adopted four factors for a trial court to consider when determining whether a knowing, voluntary and intelligent waiver ha | 2 | 2 |
Poynter v. Stategreen2 sentences2019“Waiver of assistance of counsel may be established based upon the particular facts and circumstances surrounding the case, including the background, experience, and conduct of the accused.” Id. [17] “It is well established that there is a strong presumption against the waiver of the right to counsel, and it is the trial court that bears the ‘serious and weighty responsibility to determine whether there was an intelligent and competent waiver.’” Wirthlin v. State, 99 N.E.3d 699, 704 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018) (quoting Eaton v. State, 894 N.E.2d 213, 217 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008)) (emphasis supplied), tra 2019“Waiver of assistance of counsel may be established based upon the particular facts and circumstances surrounding the case, including the background, experience, and conduct of the accused.” Id. [12] “It is well established that there is a strong presumption against the waiver of the right to counsel, and it is the trial court that bears the ‘serious and weighty responsibility to determine whether there was an intelligent and competent waiver.’” Wirthlin v. State, 99 N.E.3d 699, 704 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018) (quoting Eaton v. State, 894 N.E.2d 213, 217 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008)) (emphasis supplied), tra | 2 | 2 |
Morgan v. Stategreen2 sentences1988In a criminal proceeding, we impose "the serious and weighty responsibility upon the trial judge of determining whether there is an intelligent and competent waiver [of the right to counsel] by the accused." Johnson v. Zerbst (1938), 304 U.S. 458, 465 , 58 S.Ct. 1019, 1023 , 82 L.Ed. 1461 ; see also Morgan v. State (1981), Ind.App., 417 N.E.2d 1154 . 1988In a *455 criminal proceeding, we impose "the serious and weighty responsibility upon the trial judge of determining whether there is an intelligent and competent waiver [of the right to counsel] by the accused." Johnson v. Zerbst (1938), 304 U.S. 458, 465 , 58 S.Ct. 1019, 1023 , 82 L.Ed. 1461 ; see also Morgan v. State (1981), Ind. App., 417 N.E.2d 1154 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Johnson v. Zerbst
green
2 sentences2019The Court went on to find that it is the responsibility of the trial judge to determine whether there is an intelligent and competent waiver and that it would be "fitting and appropriate for that determination to appear on the record." Id. at 465 , 58 S.Ct. at 1023 , 82 L.Ed. at 1467 . 2019The Court went on to find that it is the responsibility of the trial judge to determine whether there is an intelligent and competent waiver and that it would be "fitting and appropriate for that determination to appear on the record." Id. at 465 , 58 S.Ct. at 1023 , 82 L.Ed. at 1467 . | 10 | 1970–2019 |
Jones v. State
green
2 sentences2019“Waiver of assistance of counsel may be established based upon the particular facts and circumstances surrounding the case, including the background, experience, and conduct of the accused.” Id. [17] “It is well established that there is a strong presumption against the waiver of the right to counsel, and it is the trial court that bears the ‘serious and weighty responsibility to determine whether there was an intelligent and competent waiver.’” Wirthlin v. State, 99 N.E.3d 699, 704 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018) (quoting Eaton v. State, 894 N.E.2d 213, 217 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008)) (emphasis supplied), tra 2019“Waiver of assistance of counsel may be established based upon the particular facts and circumstances surrounding the case, including the background, experience, and conduct of the accused.” Id. [12] “It is well established that there is a strong presumption against the waiver of the right to counsel, and it is the trial court that bears the ‘serious and weighty responsibility to determine whether there was an intelligent and competent waiver.’” Wirthlin v. State, 99 N.E.3d 699, 704 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018) (quoting Eaton v. State, 894 N.E.2d 213, 217 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008)) (emphasis supplied), tra | 2 | 2019–2019 |
Mitchell v. State
green
1 sentence2018To discharge the duty imposed, a judge must investigate as long and as thoroughly as the circumstances of the case before him demand.' " Eaton v. State , 894 N.E.2d 213 , 217 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (quoting Mitchell v. State , 417 N.E.2d 364 , 369 (Ind. Ct. App. 1981) (internal citations omitted) ). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Jackson v. State
green
1 sentence2013In Jackson , we pointed out that “a defendant’s absence from trial does not constitute a waiver of the right to counsel in every case.” Jackson, 868 N.E.2d at 499 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Wallace v. State
green
2 sentences1988Not only must an accused be aware of the nature, extent and importance of the right to counsel, but the accused must be made aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation and the possible consequences thereof so "his choice is made with his eyes open." Wallace v. State (1977), 172 Ind.App. 535 , 361 N.E.2d 159, 164 , trans. denied. 1988Not only must an accused be aware of the nature, extent and importance of the right to counsel, but the accused must be made aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation and the possible consequences thereof so "his choice is made with his eyes open." Wallace v. State (1977), 172 Ind.App. 535 , 361 N.E.2d 159, 164 , trans. denied. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Grubbs v. State
green
2 sentences1979While an accused may waive the right to counsel, whether there is a proper waiver should be clearly determined by the trial court, and it would be fitting and appropriate for that determination to appear upon the record.’ 304 U.S. at 465 , 58 S.Ct. at 1023 .” 255 Ind. at 418 , 265 N.E.2d at 44 . 1979While an accused may waive the right to counsel, whether there is a proper waiver should be clearly determined by the trial court, and it would be fitting and appropriate for that determination to appear upon the record.’ 304 U.S. at 465 , 58 S.Ct. at 1023 .” 255 Ind. at 418 , 265 N.E.2d at 44 . | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Grimes v. State
green
2 sentences1972While an accused may waive the right to counsel, whether there is a proper waiver should be clearly determined by the trial court, and it would be fitting and appropriate for that determination to appear upon the record.’ 304 U.S. at 465 , 58 S. Ct. at 1023 .” In the case of Grimes v. State (1972), 257 Ind. 660 , 278 N. E. 2d 271 , in an opinion by Justice DeBruler, the question of a defendant’s right to assistance of counsel during arraignment leaves nothing to the imagination. 1972While an accused may waive the right to counsel, whether there is a proper waiver should be clearly determined by the trial court, and it would be fitting and appropriate for that determination to appear upon the record.’ 304 U.S. at 465 , 58 S. Ct. at 1023 .” In the case of Grimes v. State (1972), 257 Ind. 660 , 278 N. E. 2d 271 , in an opinion by Justice DeBruler, the question of a defendant’s right to assistance of counsel during arraignment leaves nothing to the imagination. | 1 | 1972–1972 |
Batchelor v. State
green
1 sentence1951While an accused may waive the right to counsel, whether there is a proper waiver should be clearly determined by the trial court, and it would be fitting and appropriate for that determination to appear upon the record.” See Batchelor v. State (1920), 189 Ind. 69 , 125 N. E. 773 . | 1 | 1951–1951 |
Trkulja v. State
green
1 sentence1951While an accused may waive the right to counsel, whether there is a proper waiver should be clearly determined by the trial court, and it would be fitting and appropriate for that determination to appear upon the record.” See Batchelor v. State (1920), 189 Ind. 69 , 125 N. E. 773 . | 1 | 1951–1951 |
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.