Jamail v. State
Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
1Dissent 1
*714OPINION
2Dissent · LevyLevy, Justice
I. dissent because, as stated more fully in my dissenting opinon in Ramirez v. State, 721 S.W.2d 490, 491 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1986, pet. granted), implicit in the constitutional right to counsel is the assurance that the right, to be effective, will be available when needed. If the right to the assistance of counsel is shaped by the need for such assistance, as I believe it is, then logic requires that the right attach not merely during trial, but rather at the earlier stages in the criminal justice process where critical events might well settle the accused’s fate and reduce…
3Cases cited7 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Doyle v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- South Dakota v. NevilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Maine v. MoultonSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Dudley v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1977
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.