Legal Opinion
Watson v. DISTRICT COURT IN & FOR FOURTH JUD.
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided January 7, 1980No. 79SA111PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Erickson
This is an original proceeding which is buttressed by only a skeleton record. The petitioner, Arthur Jerome Watson, seeks a writ of prohibition to prevent the respondent district court from forcing him to go to trial immediately after a scheduled hearing on his counsel’s motion to withdraw. Petitioner also seeks a writ of mandamus requiring the trial court to allow his counsel to withdraw because of a conflict of interest. As a result of our rule to show cause, the continuance sought by petitioner has in effect been granted. We now discharge the rule.
On March 21,1978, the petitioner was…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Glasser v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Holloway v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Allen v. District CourtSupreme Court of Colorado · 1974
- Jewell Greenberry White v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1968
- People v. RomeroSupreme Court of Colorado · 1975
3Cited by7 opinions
- Rodriguez v. StateArizona Supreme Court · 1981
- People v. DemarestColorado Court of Appeals · 1990
- People v. RayColorado Court of Appeals · 1990
- United States v. KidwellU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1985
- Opinion No. (1980) Ag, Oklahoma Attorney General Reports1980
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.