Legal Opinion

Jones v. Balkcom

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided November 25, 1953No. 18393PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Aumand, Justice.

1. There is no complaint that Jones was denied due process of law by reason of any action or non-action by the court or its officials in the conduct of the trial. The sole complaint is that he did not have the benefit of counsel as guaranteed by the Federal and State Constitutions, in that his counsel was so incompetent, unfaithful, and negligent in representing him at his trial, that he was virtually unrepresented.

The incompetence, negligence, or unfaithfulness of defendant’s counsel who was selected by him in the trial of a criminal case does not as a general rule constitute…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Walker v. JohnstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  3. Wilcoxon v. AldredgeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1941
  4. Williams v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1941
  5. Fambles v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1896

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State v. SneedSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  2. Sims v. BalkcomSupreme Court of Georgia · 1964
  3. Estes v. PerkinsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1969
  4. Peppers v. BalkcomSupreme Court of Georgia · 1963
  5. Hill v. BalkcomSupreme Court of Georgia · 1957

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API