Supreme Court of Kansas· 9/25/2015

State v. Pfannenstiel

Citations

302 Kan. 747
357 P.3d 877
2015 Kan. LEXIS 808

How courts have described this case

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

finding the court errs if, after conducting appropriate inquiry, its refusal to appoint substitute counsel was unreasonable
finding the court errs if, after conducting appropriate inquiry, its refusal to appoint substitute counsel was unreasonable
finding no impermissible advocacy in attorney's evaluative statement regarding her strategy, stating she felt Pfannenstiel's witnesses would not be helpful and might undermine his testimony
noting federal courts addressing potential conflict of interest have routinely included timeliness or potential delay as one of the factors considered when determining whether a trial court abused its discretion in denying a motion for new counsel
\A defendant who files a motion for new counsel must show justifiable dissatisfaction with his or her appointed counsel.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Biles, Luckert, Rosen

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

18 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

51 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named State v. Pfannenstiel

5 other CourtListener records share this case 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.