Legal Opinion
Hill v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama
Decided November 30, 1990No. CR-89-37PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ON RETURN TO REMAND
On return to remand, the trial court appointed appellate counsel in accordance with our instructions, and counsel has filed a brief on behalf of appellant. Appellant also has filed a pro se brief. We will consider the contentions raised in both briefs in our review of the case.
Appellant first contends that he did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to trial counsel. We do not agree. He insisted on representing himself at trial.
While an indigent defendant is constitutionally entitled to appointed counsel in criminal prosecutions, he can waive this right and…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Raulerson v. WainwrightCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1984
- Dixon v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1985
- Westmoreland v. CITY OF HARTSELLCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1986
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- DeFries v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1992
- Moody v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 2011
- Clemons v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 2001
- Moye v. City of FoleyCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1993
- James Floyd Smelcher v. Attorney General of Alabama John E. NagleCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1991
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.