Haynes v. State of Florida

How courts have described this case

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

• holding a defendant did not have a right to effective assistance of counsel when engaged in pre-indictment plea negotiations with a government attorney
• explaining that another panel’s ruling is binding unless a Supreme Court decision mandates otherwise or the Sixth Circuit overrules the prior ruling en banc (citing Salmi v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 774 F.2d 685, 689 (6th Cir. 1985))
• analyzing precedent and holding that a “bright line” must be applied to determine when the right to effective assistance of counsel attaches
• “[T]he earlier determination is binding authority unless a decision of the United States Supreme Court mandates modification or this Court sitting en banc overrules the prior decision.”
• \The Supreme Court's holding that the Sixth Amendment right attaches only 'at or after the initiation of judicial criminal proceedings' . . . is a bright line test.\
• “This panel may not overrule the decision of another panel; the earlier determination is binding authority unless a decision of the United States Supreme Court mandates modification or this Court sitting en banc overrules the prior decision.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).