State v. Madsen
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtJ.M. Johnson, J.
¶1 This case involves a criminal defendant’s “right to appear and defend in person, or by counsel,” which is expressly protected by Washington Constitution article I, section 22. Kurt Madsen was first represented in a criminal proceeding by counsel appointed for him. Unhappy with counsel, Madsen moved to proceed pro se on three occasions, citing and quoting the relevant Washington constitutional provision. The trial court deferred ruling on the first two motions and instead appointed new counsel. Madsen’s third motion was formally denied the day before scheduled jury selection. We reverse the…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Brewer v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- State v. StensonWashington Supreme Court · 1997
- State v. StensonWashington Supreme Court · 1997
- State v. RohrichWashington Supreme Court · 2003
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by67 opinions
- State v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2012
- State v. MadsenWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. ColeyWashington Supreme Court · 2014
- State v. CurryWashington Supreme Court · 2018
- State v. BurnsWashington Supreme Court · 2019
62 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.