Hill v. State
Supreme Court of Delaware
1Opinion of the Court
DUFFY, Justice:
Defendants were convicted of kidnapping and rape and they appeal alleging violations of their Federal rights.
I
First, defendants say that they were denied effective assistance of counsel in violation of their Sixth Amendment rights because they were represented by the same trial attorneys (Public Defenders). Two attorneys were involved but both represented each defendant. Defendants now argue that such representation amounted to a conflict of interest sufficient to deprive them of constitutional rights.
We hold that joint representation of co-defendants by the same attorney or…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Glasser v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Bruton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Jackson v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- California v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- People v. GombergNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- Foraker v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1978
- Hatcher v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1975
- Commonwealth v. NicholsonMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1985
- Doran v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1992
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.