Legal Opinion

Bittick v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided April 1, 2003No. WD 60885PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ROBERT ULRICH, Judge.

Larry D. Bittick (“Mr. Bittick”) appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his pro se motion to disqualify appellate defender as his appointed counsel, to proceed pro se, and striking his amended Rule 29.15 motion. Mr. Bittick raises two points on appeal. He claims his appointed counsel had an inherent conflict of interest because he asserts that his appellate and postconviction motion counsel were affiliated with the same office, and he claimed in his motion that the requisite standard of representation pre- and postconviction motion was breached. Mr. Bittick…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Coleman v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  3. Pennsylvania v. FinleySupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  4. State v. McMillinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1990
  5. State v. HunterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1992

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. BlackSupreme Court of Missouri · 2007
  2. Fred Silver, Movant/Appellant v. State of MissouriMissouri Court of Appeals · 2015
  3. Daugherty v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2005
  4. White v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2006
  5. ANN MARGARET WILLIAMS, Movant-Appellant v. STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent-Respondent.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2016

3 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