Legal Opinion

In Re the Personal Restraint of Richardson

Washington Supreme Court

Decided December 29, 1983No. 48192-0PublishedCited by 74 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtUtter, J.

In this personal restraint petition, petitioner Gary Richardson raises several claims. While we conclude that most of them lack merit, his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is meritorious. The record establishes that trial counsel previously represented an important witness in the case. This establishes a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel, for the trial court should have been aware of and inquired into this potential conflict of interest. If a potential conflict of interest existed, the trial court's failure to inquire automatically requires reversal even without…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. Glasser v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  3. United States v. FradySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  4. Cuyler v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. Doyle v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1976

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by74 opinions

  1. State v. KitchenWashington Supreme Court · 2004
  2. State v. DhaliwalWashington Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Matter of Personal Restraint of St. PierreWashington Supreme Court · 1992
  4. In Re the Disciplinary Proceeding Against DemingWashington Supreme Court · 1987
  5. State v. DavisWashington Supreme Court · 2000

69 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API