State v. McCulloch

How courts have described this case

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

• pro se motion while appellant is represented by counsel presents nothing for appellate court to review because criminal defendants are not entitled to hybrid representation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Yeargan
  Tennessee Supreme Court· 1997-11-24· cited 776×
• State v. Hicks
  Tennessee Supreme Court· 2001-09-11· cited 250×
• State v. Cox
  Tennessee Supreme Court· 2005-08-26· cited 168×
• State of Tennessee v. Lawrence Ralph, Sr.
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee· 2005-08-25
• State of Tennessee v. Charles Jackson, Jr.
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee· 2004-12-14
• Coleman Nichols v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 2nd Dist. (Fort Worth)· 2015-02-05
• Nichols, Coleman
  Court of Appeals of Texas· 2015-05-11
• Oscar Edward Meza v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 1st Dist. (Houston)· 2017-06-13
• Steve Cabello v. the State of Texas
  Tex. App. Ct., 12th Dist. (Tyler)· 2023-03-31

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Terry v. Ohio
  Supreme Court· 1968-06-10· cited 37,942×
• Delaware v. Prouse
  Supreme Court· 1979-03-27· cited 5,549×
• Hughes v. State
  Tennessee Supreme Court· 1979-10-09· cited 87×
• State v. Blankenship
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee· 1988-04-26· cited 6×
• Roberson v. Metropolitan Government
  Court of Appeals of Tennessee· 1966-04-01· cited 5×