State v. Thornblad
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PETERSON, Judge.
On appeal from his conviction for terroristic threats, appellant Joseph Thornblad argues the trial court erred in finding him incompetent to represent himself when he had been found competent to stand trial. We agree Thornblad’s constitutional right to self-representation was violated and reverse and remand for a new trial.
FACTS
Appellant Joseph Thornblad contacted the director of an advocacy group for the mentally ill seeking assistance in stopping the forced medication of patients in state psychiatric hospitals and in establishing law li braries in those hospitals.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Godinez v. MoranSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Oregon v. HassSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- PruneYard Shopping Center v. RobinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- State v. KlessigWisconsin Supreme Court · 1997
- People v. TaylorCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009
- State v. CamachoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- State v. BrodieCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1995
- State v. PirsigCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2003
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.