Legal Opinion
People v. Dennany
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided June 21, 1994No. Docket Nos. 94225, 95271, (Calendar Nos. 2-3)PublishedCited by 46 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGriffin, J.
We consolidated and granted leave to appeal in these two cases to consider the requisite judicial inquiry to be made before a criminal defendant who affirmatively seeks to proceed in propria persona1 may be permitted to waive his correlative right to counsel and represent himself.
In People v Jones, we conclude that the trial court committed error requiring reversal by failing *417to advise defendant of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, and, therefore, we affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals, which ordered a new trial.
In People v Dennany, a new trial is also required.…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCannSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Rock v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- McKaskle v. WigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by46 opinions
- People v. KevorkianMichigan Court of Appeals · 2002
- People v. RussellMichigan Supreme Court · 2004
- People v. RiceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1999
- Ex Parte ArthurSupreme Court of Alabama · 1997
- People v. AdkinsMichigan Supreme Court · 1996
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.