Legal Opinion

State v. Fiala

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 15, 1991No. 10-89-08865 CA A65251 (Control), CA A65252PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.

Defendant appeals from convictions for sexual abuse in the first degree. ORS 163.425. He argues that the trial court erred in denying his request for court-appointed counsel and in not advising him of the consequences of proceeding to trial without counsel. We reverse.

After the arraignment, defendant’s retained attorney was allowed to withdraw, and the court granted defendant’s request for a court-appointed attorney. Thereafter, the court withdrew the appointment. Defendant argues that the court abused its discretion, because its decision was based on the credit limit available to defendant…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. VernaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1972
  2. State v. SchmickCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
  3. State v. LingrenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986
  4. State v. CarterCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
  5. State Ex Rel Juvenile Department v. AfanasievCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. VincentUtah Supreme Court · 1994
  2. State v. MeyerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
  3. State v. PearsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
  4. State v. ColeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
  5. State v. RochefortCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994

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