Skip to main content

Hamm v. State

Citations

  • 913 So. 2d 460
  • 2002 WL 126990

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that Rule 32 petitioner had no right to counsel in Rule 32 proceedings
  • holding that Rule 32 petitioner had no right to counsel in Rule 32 proceedings
  • holding that Rule 32 petitioner had no right to counsel in Rule 32 proceedings
  • explaining that Rule 32 proceedings are a postconviction remedy collaterally attacking criminal proceedings “after the defendant has failed to secure relief through direct review of his conviction”
  • \Recitation of allegations without citation to any legal authority and without adequate recitation of the facts relied upon has been deemed a waiver of the arguments listed.\
  • “No amendment, statute, or caselaw guarantees the absolute right to representation by any particular counsel or by counsel of the accused’s choice, even in a criminal trial.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cobb

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

75 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

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

Other cases named Hamm v. State

59 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

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.