Hill v. State
Mississippi Supreme Court
1ConcurrenceKitchens, Justice
¶ 27. Our constitutional guarantees that the accused have assistance of counsel require reversal of Hill’s conviction. Thus, I concur with the disposition. U.S. Const, amend. VI (“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ... to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”); Miss. Const, art. 3, § 26 (“In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall have a right to be heard by himself or counsel, or both....”). The Court correctly finds that a conflict of interest arose during trial and that Hill’s court-appointed counsel, Stephanie Mallette, should not have been…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Cuyler v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Holloway v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- McKaskle v. WigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Wood v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.