Legal Opinion

State v. Martinez

Court of Appeals of Utah

Decided February 22, 2013No. 20110015-CAPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Memorandum Decision

ORME, Judge:

T1 Defendant argues that his convictions should be vacated and a new trial ordered because his trial attorneys labored under a conflict of interest that adversely affected their performance in representing him. Defendant also contends that the trial court improperly denied his motions to appoint new counsel and failed to adequately inquire into the nature of the conflict between Defendant and his counsel. We affirm.

12 Defense counsel's efforts on Defendant's behalf appear to have been quite thorough. In the months leading up to trial, Defendant's attorneys…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  4. United States v. CronicSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  5. Cuyler v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1980

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. MasonCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2024
  2. State v. GoodrichCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2016
  3. State v. MartinezCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API