Legal Opinion

Treece v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided October 11, 1988No. 174, September Term, 1987PublishedCited by 59 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ADKINS, Judge.

The first question presented in this case is whether a criminal defendant or the defendant’s counsel is entitled to decide to defend on the basis of a plea of not criminally responsible by reason of insanity. The Circuit Court for Prince George’s County and the Court of Special Appeals agreed that, despite the objections of the client, the decision was for defense counsel to make. Treece v. State, 72 Md.App. 644, 532 A.2d 175 (1987). We shall hold that a defendant who is competent is entitled to decide whether the defense of criminal responsibility is to be interposed at that…

2Cases cited63 opinions

  1. Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  3. North Carolina v. AlfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  4. Illinois v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  5. Dusky v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960

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

3Cited by59 opinions

  1. Hunt v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1990
  2. Grandison v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995
  3. State v. CarterSupreme Court of Kansas · 2000
  4. Hof v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995
  5. Hunt v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997

54 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