Skip to main content

Lewis v. State

Citations

  • 757 A.2d 709
  • 2000 Del. LEXIS 317
  • 2000 WL 1175088

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that there was an actual conflict in the dual representation at trial by the same public defender and that defendant demonstrated prejudice by the divergence of the clients’ interests and also by “what the record reflects [defendant’s] attorney did not do on his behalf.”
  • acknowledging that professional conduct regulations “are not intended to create substantive or procedural rights”
  • holding that Superior Court Criminal Rule 44(c
  • invoking the “interests of justice” exception because, on appeal, defendant raised “important questions” relating to the Sixth Amendment and “fundamental fairness in the administration of justice”; finding violations
  • “The Sixth Amendment right to the effective assistance of counsel provides for representation that is ‘free from conflicts of interest or divided loyalties.’”
  • “The Comment to Rule 1.7 [of the Delaware Lawyers’ Rules of Professional Conduct] states ‘[t]he potential for conflict of interest in representing multiple defendants in a criminal case is so grave that ordinarily a lawyer should decline to represent more than one codefendant.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Veasey, Walsh, Holland

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

50 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.