Supreme Court of Connecticut· 7/3/1984
State v. Gethers
Citations
- 193 Conn. 526
- 480 A.2d 435
- 1984 Conn. LEXIS 624
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- defendant’s attorney informed court that defendant wanted to exercise right to examine jurors without attorney’s participation
- the trial court “may appropriately presume that defense counsel has explained the nature of the offense in sufficient detail”
- “[o]nce it is determined that there has been a constitutionally valid waiver of counsel, a defendant cannot be denied his right to try his own case simply because of some insubstantial nonconformity with [Practice Book § 44-3]”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Healey, Shea
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
51 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- State v. WebbSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1996-07-30· cited 214×
- Johnson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1988-11-16· cited 194×
- State v. LeecanSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1986-02-04· cited 192×
- State v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1993-09-07· cited 172×
- Parren v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1987-04-06· cited 135×
- Phillips v. WardenSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1991-08-13· cited 128×
- Johnson v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court· 1995-01-31· cited 113×
- State v. DaySupreme Court of Connecticut· 1995-06-27· cited 107×
- State v. ThurmanConnecticut Appellate Court· 1987-03-31· cited 96×
- State v. GethersSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1985-09-03· cited 82×
- State v. MedinaSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1994-01-18· cited 80×
- Sekou v. WardenSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1990-12-25· cited 73×
- State v. ConnorSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2009-07-14· cited 66×
- State v. GonzalezSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1987-12-29· cited 66×
- State v. D'AntonioSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2005-08-02· cited 65×
- State v. CollinsSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2011-01-05· cited 62×
- State v. WolffSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1996-07-09· cited 62×
- State v. WatsonSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1986-02-11· cited 56×
- Rowe v. GodouConnecticut Appellate Court· 1987-11-03· cited 55×
- State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1986-03-04· cited 46×
Cites
53 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court· 1975-06-30· cited 11,585×
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court· 1938-05-31· cited 10,545×
- Brady v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1970-05-04· cited 7,191×
- Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCannSupreme Court· 1943-01-04· cited 2,192×
- Carnley v. CochranSupreme Court· 1962-04-30· cited 1,897×
- Von Moltke v. GilliesSupreme Court· 1948-01-19· cited 1,645×
- Henderson v. MorganSupreme Court· 1976-06-17· cited 1,382×
- Avery v. AlabamaSupreme Court· 1940-01-02· cited 706×
- Wold v. WoldSupreme Court· 1982-10-04· cited 312×
- United States v. Welty, John JacobThird Circuit· 1982-03-02· cited 263×
- Thomas McKee v. David Harris, Superintendent, Green Haven Correctional Facility, Stormville, New YorkSecond Circuit· 1981-05-28· cited 231×
- United States v. Joseph CalabroSecond Circuit· 1972-09-21· cited 215×
- Ronald Maynard v. Larry MeachumFirst Circuit· 1976-11-19· cited 213×
- People v. AndersonMichigan Supreme Court· 1976-12-21· cited 187×
- Barham v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1973-02-20· cited 152×
- William Brown, Jr. v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1959-02-05· cited 147×
- Diorio v. Kreisler-Borg Construction Co.Supreme Court· 1981-03-30· cited 126×
- State v. MasonSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1982-03-30· cited 121×
- State v. ScielzoSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1983-05-24· cited 113×
- State v. ReedSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1978-02-28· cited 109×
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.