Legal Opinion
Luther Cain v. Howard Peters and Roland Burris
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided September 14, 1992No. 90-3737PublishedCited by 61 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge.
During the proceedings leading to his trial for murder, Luther Cain asked the judge to replace his court-appointed attorney. Cain told the judge that he did not trust the public defender but could not articulate the reason. When the judge declined to appoint a new lawyer for him, Cain inquired whether he was entitled to represent himself. The judge said yes, and Cain stated: “I choose at this point in time to represent myself.” This led the judge to deliver the usual warnings about the folly of rolling lawyer and client into one. Cain rejoined that he had nothing to…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Estelle v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Sumner v. MataSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by61 opinions
- People v. MarshallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
- Robert R. Cuppett v. Jack R. Duckworth, Superintendent, Indiana State ReformatoryCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1993
- People v. PecoraroIllinois Supreme Court · 1997
- United States v. Darryl Lamont JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2000
- People v. BurtonIllinois Supreme Court · 1998
56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.