Arizona Supreme Court· 7/2/2004

State v. Hampton

Citations

92 P.3d 871
208 Ariz. 241
430 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 29
2004 Ariz. LEXIS 75

How courts have described this case

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

stating that a finding of forfeiture “should result only when less restrictive measures are inappropriate,” and declining to hold that conduct warranted forfeiture, even though the defendant threatened the lawyer’s life
explaining that the court must “both warn[] the defendant 22 that further disruptive conduct may result in the loss of the right to counsel and explain[] the implications of such a waiver.”
holding an indigent defendant has no right to a particular appointed attorney
discussing the ways a defendant can waive the right to counsel
“A defendant can affirmatively waive the right to counsel at trial, as 11 STATE v. BACKUS Decision of the Court long as the waiver is knowing, voluntary and intelligent.”
defendant’s waiver of right to counsel must be knowing, voluntary, and intelligent

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hurwitz, Jones, McGregor, Berch, Ryan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

19 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

13 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.