Legal Opinion
State v. Smith
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
Decided June 16, 2015No. COA14–1314PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
STEPHENS, Judge.
*620This appeal concerns the proper procedure a trial court should follow when appointed counsel for an indigent criminal defendant moves during trial for mandatory withdrawal of his representation pursuant to Rule 1.16(a) of the North Carolina Rules of Professional Conduct. We hold that a trial court does not abuse its discretion in permitting withdrawal where appointed counsel cites Comment 3 to Rule 1.16 as grounds for withdrawal and that the court is not required to appoint substitute counsel in such circumstances.
Factual and Procedural Background
Defendant Artie Stevenson…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- United States v. CronicSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Kimmelman v. MorrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- State v. HennisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
- Jimmy Lee Horton v. Walter Zant, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification CenterCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1991
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2017
- State v. CurryCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2017
- State of Iowa v. Walter Lee Miller, Jr.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2022
- State v. MooreCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2022
- State v. MooreCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2022
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.