Skip to main content

Austin v. State

Citations

  • 609 A.2d 728
  • 327 Md. 375
  • 1992 Md. LEXIS 128
  • 1992 WL 172305

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • concluding that the trial record sufficiently demonstrated that counsel’s conflicts of interest adversely affected his performance
  • concluding that the trial record sufficiently demonstrated that counsel's conflicts of interest adversely affected his performance
  • holding that an actual conflict of interest existed where defense counsel’s law partner represented a co-defendant who testified adversely to the defendant
  • stating that once the judge perceived the conflict, he should have asked the client whether he waived the conflict; in failing to do so, and allowing the conflicted representation to continue, the judge reached an improper compromise
  • “[C]ases which have considered the issue have generally concluded that representation of codefendants by partners or associates in a private law firm should be treated the same, for purposes of conflict of interest analysis, as representation of codefendants by one attorney.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Murphy, Eldridge, Rodowsky, McAuliffe, Chasanow, Smith

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

16 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

48 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.