Legal Opinion

State v. Brewer

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided October 13, 1997No. 24699PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Per curiam

Following the denial of appellant’s motion to proceed pro se in this capital case, we issued a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the circuit court. We reverse.

It is well-established that an accused may waive the right to counsel and proceed pro se. Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975); State v. Dixon, 269 S.C. 107, 236 S.E.2d 419 (1977). Although a defendant’s decision to proceed pro se may.be to the defendant’s own detriment, it “must be honored out of that respect for the individual which is the lifeblood of the law.” Faretta v. California,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. United States v. Odell BennettCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1976
  3. State v. SimsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1991
  4. United States v. LorickCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1985
  5. State v. BrownSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1986

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. State v. HesterTennessee Supreme Court · 2010
  2. United States v. Dylann RoofCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2021
  3. State v. ReedSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1998
  4. State v. SmallTennessee Supreme Court · 1999
  5. State of Tennessee v. Henry Lee JonesTennessee Supreme Court · 2019

10 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