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.
13 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 2016–2025 11 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Kansas 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 |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Lowell Baisdengreen2 sentences2024Analysis "'The focus of the justifiable dissatisfaction inquiry is on the adequacy of counsel in the adversarial process, not the accused's relationship with his attorney.'" Pfannenstiel, 302 Kan. at 761 -62 (quoting United States v. Baisden, 713 F.3d 450, 454 [8th Cir. 2013]). 2024Analysis "'The focus of the justifiable dissatisfaction inquiry is on the adequacy of counsel in the adversarial process, not the accused's relationship with his attorney.'" Pfannenstiel, 302 Kan. at 761 -62 (quoting United States v. Baisden, 713 F.3d 450, 454 [8th Cir. 2013]). | 5 | 5 |
State v. Pfannenstielgreen2 sentences2024Analysis "'The focus of the justifiable dissatisfaction inquiry is on the adequacy of counsel in the adversarial process, not the accused's relationship with his attorney.'" Pfannenstiel, 302 Kan. at 761 -62 (quoting United States v. Baisden, 713 F.3d 450, 454 [8th Cir. 2013]). 2024Analysis "'The focus of the justifiable dissatisfaction inquiry is on the adequacy of counsel in the adversarial process, not the accused's relationship with his attorney.'" Pfannenstiel, 302 Kan. at 761 -62 (quoting United States v. Baisden, 713 F.3d 450, 454 [8th Cir. 2013]). | 1 | 6 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Staten
green
2 sentences2025The primary purpose of the justifiable dissatisfaction inquiry is "'the adequacy of counsel in the adversarial process, not the accused's relationship with his attorney.'" Staten, 304 Kan. at 972 . 2025The primary purpose of the justifiable dissatisfaction inquiry is "'the adequacy of counsel in the adversarial process, not the accused's relationship with his attorney.'" Staten, 304 Kan. at 972 . | 7 | 2022–2025 |
State v. Turner
green
2 sentences2025In short, a district court may refuse to appoint new counsel if it has "'a reasonable basis for believing [that] the attorney-client relation has not deteriorated to a point where appointed counsel can no longer give effective aid in the fair presentation of a defense.'" State v. Turner, 318 Kan. 162 , 171, 542 P.3d 304 (2024). 2025In short, a district court may refuse to appoint new counsel if it has "'a reasonable basis for believing [that] the attorney-client relation has not deteriorated to a point where appointed counsel can no longer give effective aid in the fair presentation of a defense.'" State v. Turner, 318 Kan. 162 , 171, 542 P.3d 304 (2024). | 2 | 2025–2025 |
State v. Jasper
green
2 sentences2020State v. Jasper, 269 Kan. 649, 653-54 , 8 P.3d 708 (2000). 2020State v. Jasper, 269 Kan. 649, 653-54 , 8 P.3d 708 (2000). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Bryant
green
2 sentences2020Pfannenstiel, 302 Kan. at 761 -62 (quoting United States v. Baisden, 713 F.3d 450, 454 [8th Cir. 2013]). 11 "As long as the trial court has a reasonable basis for believing the attorney-client relation has not deteriorated to a point where appointed counsel can no longer give effective aid in the fair representation of a defense, the court is justified in refusing to appoint new counsel." State v. Bryant, 285 Kan. 970, 986-87 , 179 P.3d 1122 (2008). 2020Pfannenstiel, 302 Kan. at 761 -62 (quoting United States v. Baisden, 713 F.3d 450, 454 [8th Cir. 2013]). 11 "As long as the trial court has a reasonable basis for believing the attorney-client relation has not deteriorated to a point where appointed counsel can no longer give effective aid in the fair representation of a defense, the court is justified in refusing to appoint new counsel." State v. Bryant, 285 Kan. 970, 986-87 , 179 P.3d 1122 (2008). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
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.