Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Harper, 381 So. 2d 468.

97 citing documents.

State v. Scott 921 So. 2d 904 La. 2006
this court stated: As a general proposition a person accused in a criminal trial has the right to counsel of his choice.
State v. Brown 907 So. 2d 1 La. 2005
: An indigent defendant does not have the right to have a particular attorney appointed to represent him.
State v. Thomas 902 So. 2d 1166 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
the supreme court said that as a general proposition, a person accused in a criminal trial has the|Rright to counsel of his choice.
State v. Bruce 864 So. 2d 854 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
State of Louisiana v. Chet K. Whatley La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
State v. Whatley 858 So. 2d 751 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
State v. Lookadoo 847 So. 2d 645 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
“As a general proposition a person accused in a criminal trial has the right to counsel of his choice.” State v. Jones, 97-2593, p. 3 (La.3/4/98), , -71 (La.1980); La.
State v. Marshall 843 So. 2d 469 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
State v. Jones, 97-2593 (La.3/4/98), , (-71 (La.1980)); La.
State v. Wilson 833 So. 2d 560 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
State v. Barr 806 So. 2d 137 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
State v. Griffin 793 So. 2d 415 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
-71 (La.1980), this Court stated: As a general proposition a person accused in a criminal trial has the right to counsel of his choice.
State v. Harrison 782 So. 2d 86 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
“As a general proposition a person accused in a criminal trial has the right to counsel of his choice.” State v. Jones, 97-2593, p. 3 (La.3/4/98), , (-71 (La.1980)); La.
State v. Johnson 778 So. 2d 706 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
State v. Givens 776 So. 2d 443 La. 2001
Const. art. I, § 13; State v. Jones, 97-2593, pp. 2-3 (La.3/4/98), -77 (-71 (La.1980)).
State v. Luna 772 So. 2d 249 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
State v. Marshall 774 So. 2d 244 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
"`As a general proposition a person accused in a criminal trial has the right to counsel of his choice.'" State v. Jones, 97-2593, p. 3 (La.3/4/98), , -71 (La.1980); La.
State v. Zihlavsky 764 So. 2d 250 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
2nd Cir. 10/30/96), , writ denied, 96-2844 (La.4/25/97)
State v. Held 748 So. 2d 608 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
State v. Owens, 30,903 (La.App.2d Cir.09/25/98), , writ denied, 98-2723 (La.02/05/99), ; State v. Foster, 29,459 (La.
State v. Givens 750 So. 2d 242 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
that a defendant has the right to counsel of his choice and that an indigent defendant has the right to appointed counsel.
State v. Flanagan 744 So. 2d 718 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
State v. Cook 742 So. 2d 912 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
State v. McGhee 739 So. 2d 222 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
State v. Dunn 713 So. 2d 479 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
State v. Jones 707 So. 2d 975 La. 1998
-71 (La.1980), this Court stated: As a general proposition a person accused in a criminal trial has the right to counsel of his choice.
State v. King 702 So. 2d 814 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
State v. Foster 697 So. 2d 616 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
State v. Foster 697 So. 2d 616 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
State v. Neville 695 So. 2d 534 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
State v. Guccione 694 So. 2d 1060 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
State v. Batiste 687 So. 2d 499 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
State v. Thomas 683 So. 2d 1272 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
the supreme court said: As a general proposition a person accused in a criminal trial has the right to counsel of his choice.
State v. Hayes 670 So. 2d 683 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
State v. Bond 650 So. 2d 354 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
State v. Kennon 588 So. 2d 1348 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
State v. Mitchell 580 So. 2d 1006 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1991
State v. Jones 565 So. 2d 1023 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
State v. Goodwin 551 So. 2d 715 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. McClintock 535 So. 2d 1231 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
State v. Bradley 535 So. 2d 1108 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
State v. Crawford 520 So. 2d 950 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
the Supreme Court stated that a “defendant’s refusal without good cause to proceed with able appointed counsel amounted to a waiver of his right to assistance of counsel.” There is only minimal evidence in the record addressing Yeager’s alleged inadequacy or defendant’s dissatisfaction.
State v. Balfa 506 So. 2d 1369 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
2374 , 80 L.Ed.2d 847 (1984)
State v. Dupre 500 So. 2d 873 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
State v. Lowenfield 450 So. 2d 675 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
State Ex Rel. Johnson v. Maggio 449 So. 2d 547 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
State v. Kirkpatrick 443 So. 2d 546 La. 1983
792 , 9 L.Ed.2d 799 (1963)
State v. Wiggins 399 So. 2d 206 La. 1981
State v. Carpenter 390 So. 2d 1296 La. 1980