Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Bodley, 394 So. 2d 584.

153 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Tyson Cornelison La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2024
denied, 547 U.S. 1022, 126 S. Ct. 1569, 164 L. Ed. 2d 305 (2006), (La.
State of Louisiana v. Lee R. Jackson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
is similar to the present case and offers guidance.
State of Louisiana v. Quinton Verdell Tellis La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2024
State Of Louisiana v. Laura Amanda Kozma La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2020
State Of Louisiana v. Damon Delmore La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2020
2d 466 ( per curiam), that State v. ( La.
State of Louisiana v. John Colby Manuel La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
State v. Manuel 247 So. 3d 766 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
See State v. Bodley , ; State v. Boettcher
State of Louisiana v. Timothy H. Queen -Aka- Timothy Hugh Queen La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
State v. Queen 237 So. 3d 547 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
See State v. Bodley , ; State v. Boettcher
State of Louisiana v. Reggie Patrick Thibodeaux 236 So. 3d 1253 La. 2017
State v. Huy The Dao 222 So. 3d 992 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
See Love, 847 So.2d at 1210 ; (La.
State v. McGill 213 So. 3d 1181 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2017
State of Louisiana v. Robert Leroy McCoy 218 So. 3d 535 La. 2016
State v. McCorvey 187 So. 3d 41 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
As a general rule, an indigent defendant “ ‘has a right to counsel as well as the opposite .right to represent himself, [but] he has no constitutional right to be both represented and representative.’” Mathieu , 2010-2421, p. 6, 68 So.3d at 1019 (quoting State v. Brown, 2003-0897, p. 29 (La.4/12/05), ; ).
State v. Stanfield 137 So. 3d 788 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
at p. 24, 68 So.3d at 1019 , citing State v. Brown, 03-0897, pp. 28-31 (La.4/12/05), -24 ().
State v. Wills 125 So. 3d 509 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
State v. Reyes 114 So. 3d 547 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
1420 , 22 L.Ed.2d 684 (1969); State v. Shumaker, 40,275 (La.App.2d Cir.10/28/05), .
State v. Bradham 87 So. 3d 200 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
State v. Carter 84 So. 3d 499 La. 2012
(represented defendant bound by attorney’s decisions regarding trial tactics); United States v. Daniels, 572 F.2d 535 (5th Cir.1978)(represented defendant cannot personally insist on calling a particular witness, but rather “is bound by his attorney’s decisions during trial”); United States v. O’Looney
State v. Robinson 87 So. 3d 881 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2011
State v. Lara 78 So. 3d 159 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
988 , 39 L.Ed.2d 242 (1974); State v. Shumaker, 40,275 (La.App.2d Cir.10/28/05), .
State v. Mathieu 68 So. 3d 1015 La. 2011
As a general rule, one to which this Court has long subscribed, an indigent defendant “ ‘has a right to counsel as well as the opposite right to represent himself, [but] he has no constitutional right to be both represented and representative.’ ” State v. Brown, 03-0897, p. 29 (La.4/12/05), (); see also Bell, 09-0199 at 17, n. 14, 53 So.3d at 448 (“A defendant who is represented by counsel has no Sixth Amendment right to participate as co-counsel.
State v. Kimble 62 So. 3d 782 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Bell 53 So. 3d 437 La. 2010
State of Louisiana v. Robert Allen Snelling La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
2041, 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973); (La.App.
State v. Snelling 36 So. 3d 1060 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
2041 , 36 L.Ed.2d 854 *1070 (1973); (La.App.
State v. Logan 34 So. 3d 528 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
State v. Yates 15 So. 3d 1260 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
State v. Duhon 997 So. 2d 904 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
State v. Banks 999 So. 2d 808 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
1420 , 22 L.Ed.2d 684 (1969); State v. Shumaker, 40,275 (La.App.2d Cir. 10/28/05), ; (La.
State of Louisiana v. Albert K. Alexander La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
State v. Alexander 980 So. 2d 877 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
State v. LaGarde 970 So. 2d 1111 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
State v. Brown, 03-897 (La.4/12/05)
State v. Triplet 962 So. 2d 506 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
State v. Mathieu 960 So. 2d 296 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
State v. Brown, 03-897, p. 29 (La.4/12/05)
State v. Jones 942 So. 2d 1215 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
the supreme court held that "[w]hile an indigent defendant has a right to counsel as well as the opposite right to represent himself, he has no constitutional right to be both represented and representative."
State v. CHATTERSON 942 So. 2d 646 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
1420 , 22 L.Ed.2d 684 (1969); State v. Shumaker, 40,275 (La.App.2d Cir.10/28/05), ; (La.App.
State v. Leger 936 So. 2d 108 La. 2006
This court has held that, "`[w]hile an indigent defendant has a right to counsel as well as the opposite right to represent himself, he has no constitutional right to be both represented and representative.'" State v. Brown, XXXX-XXXX p. 29 (La.4/12/05)
State v. Goins 920 So. 2d 375 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
State v. Shumaker 914 So. 2d 1156 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
1420 , 22 L.Ed.2d 684 (1969); (La.App.
State v. Malone 912 So. 2d 394 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
State v. Brown 907 So. 2d 1 La. 2005
this Court confronted a similar situation and reasoned that "while an indigent defendant has a right to counsel as well as the opposite right to represent himself, he has no constitutional right to be both represented and representative."
State v. White 903 So. 2d 580 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
State of Louisiana v. Kenry James Lewis La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
State v. Lewis 878 So. 2d 758 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
State v. Mitchell 869 So. 2d 276 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
State v. Williams 858 So. 2d 878 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
State v. MacK 850 So. 2d 1035 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
State v. Jordan, supra .
State v. Shed 828 So. 2d 124 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
State v. Brown, 32,407 (La.App.2d Cir.9/22/99), .
State v. Shed 828 So. 2d 124 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
State v. Brown, 32,407 (La.App.2d Cir.9/22/99), .