Legal Opinion

Lee-Thomas v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided April 19, 2007No. 06-CO-1096, 06-CO-1137 and 06-CO-1138PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STEADMAN, Senior Judge:

This case comes before us as an expedited interlocutory appeal from the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion to dismiss indictments against him on the basis of double jeopardy so as to bar a retrial. Appellant does not dispute that he consented to the mistrial in the initial proceeding, but contends that his consent was obtained in violation of his Sixth Amendment right to effective and conflict-free counsel and was thus invalid. Because appellant has failed to meet the requirement of Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335, 100 S.Ct. 1708, 64 L.Ed.2d 333 (1980), to show…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. United States v. CronicSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. Cuyler v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  4. Roe v. Flores-OrtegaSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  5. United States v. JornSupreme Court of the United States · 1971

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Davidson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2012
  2. Nero v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
  3. Lee-Thomas v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
  4. Walker v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API