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.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 16 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from People v. Austin M..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | People v. Austin M. Anchor | green | “in actual conflict situations the accused need not prove prejudice in that the conflict contributed to the conviction, but it is necessary to establish that an actual conflict of interest adversely affected the lawyer's performance.” | 7 |
| 2 | People v. Austin M. | green | “an actual conflict generally, if not exclusively, involves joint or multiple representation” | 5 |
| 3 | People v. Yost | green | “guarantee of conflict-free representation ensures that a defendant is provided assistance by an attorney whose allegiance to his client is not diluted by conflicting interests or inconsistent obligations.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.