Skip to main content

Lee v. State

Citations

  • 690 So. 2d 664
  • 1997 WL 122653

How courts have described this case

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

  • recognizing that where there is an alleged conflict of interest between a lawyer and client, trial court’s inadequate inquiry cannot be treated as harmless error
  • “The assistance of counsel is among those ‘constitutional rights so basic to a fair trial that their infraction can never be treated as harmless error.’ Chapman v. California, 386 U.S 18, 23 & n.8, 87 S.Ct. 824, 827-28 & n.8, 17 L.E.2d 705 (1967).”
  • \The reason appellate courts have declined to apply the harmless error rule to cases in which a defendant was deprived of the right to conflict-free counsel is that any action the lawyer refrained from taking because of the conflict would not be apparent from the record.\
  • finding defendant entitled to conflict-free counsel

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Padovano

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.