Grant v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing the “strong interest of the defendant and of the court system in sustaining an existing, close relationship between a death penalty defendant and his counsel,” where counsel were “‘already familiar with the case, which [was] both legally and factually complex’” (citation omitted)
• reversing where the trial court replaced all three of the capital defendant’s well-qualified attorneys, who had good relationships with him, because the court “wished to ensure the participation of local counsel”
• trial court abused discretion in removing appointed counsel of death penalty defen dant, as trial court’s interest in involving local counsel in case was not a sufficient “countervailing consideration” to justify removal of defendant’s preferred counsel

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Hulett v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 2014-10-20· cited 125×
• State v. Reeves
  Supreme Court of Louisiana· 2009-05-05· cited 81×
• Phan v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 2012-02-27· cited 36×
• Weis v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 2010-03-25· cited 33×
• Carman v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 2018-06-18· cited 11×
• McCullough v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 2018-08-20· cited 5×
• Williams v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 2005-03-28· cited 1×

Cites

2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Amadeo v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1989-10-05· cited 27×
• Davis v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1991-05-10· cited 20×