Skip to main content

Jenkins v. State

Citations

  • 809 N.E.2d 361
  • 2004 Ind. App. LEXIS 957
  • 2004 WL 1152830

How courts have described this case

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

  • observing that because the defendant did not claim that he explicitly made known his desire to represent himself in addition to having court-appointed counsel, the filing of pro se motions did not amount to a request to proceed with hybrid representation
  • court not required to accept pro se motions from a party that is represented by counsel

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Najam, Kirsch, Riley

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

27 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.