Legal Opinion
In Re the Personal Restraint of Rhome
Washington Supreme Court
Decided September 15, 2011No. 83788-1PublishedCited by 50 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtStephens, J.
¶1 In this original personal restraint petition, Demar Rhome argues that the state and federal constitutions require independent findings of fact that a defendant is competent to waive counsel and represent himself at trial. He also argues that the colloquy conducted by the trial court here was inadequate to secure a valid waiver of counsel. We disagree and dismiss his personal restraint petition.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
¶2 In November 2003, 17-year-old Lashonda Flynn was stabbed to death. Seventeen-year-old Kialani Brown confessed to the killing but pointed to Rhome as the mastermind…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Illinois v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCannSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- McKaskle v. WigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by50 opinions
- State v. ColeyWashington Supreme Court · 2014
- In re the Personal Restraint of HaghighiWashington Supreme Court · 2013
- State v. BurnsWashington Supreme Court · 2019
- Gilmore v. Jefferson County Pub. Transp. Benefit AreaWashington Supreme Court · 2018
- State v. Ortiz-AbregoWashington Supreme Court · 2017
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.