Skip to main content

State v. Clark

Citations

  • 722 N.W.2d 460
  • 2006 Minn. LEXIS 707
  • 2006 WL 2884169

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a request for substitute counsel where the appointed counsel obtained favorable pretrial rulings and the district court was satisfied that the attorney was prepared for trial
  • stating that an indigent defendant does not have a right to representation by a particular lawyer
  • upholding the trial court’s decision not to appoint advisory counsel after concluding the defendant was not prejudiced and received a fair trial
  • adopting the phrase “searching inquiry” from Morrissey and stating that a “searching inquiry” may be required when a defendant “voices serious allegations of inadequate representation”
  • listing as factors “ensuring, the fairness of the criminal justice process, promoting judicial efficiency, and preserving the appearance of judicial impartiality”
  • adopting the phrase “searching inquiry” from Morrissey and stating that a “searching inquiry” may be required when a defendant “voices serious allegations of inadequate representation”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Page

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

23 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.