State v. Smith

Green, J.:

The issue before this court is whether the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to appoint Charles Smith new counsel. Based on the lone assertion of Smith’s attorney who refused to present potentially relevant defense evidence on Smith’s behalf because he believed that a suspect shown in a crime surveillance video was Smith, the trial court developed a general rule covering all attorneys who could have represented Smith, thus committing the logical fallacy known as a hasty generalization. Just because Smith’s attorney believed that the suspect shown in a crime video was the…