State v. Raymond D. Kates (070971)

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that a denial of a trial adjournment to enable a defendant to obtain new retained counsel may qualify as structural error
• recognizing that while a criminal defendant has a right to counsel of choice, that right is not absolute and may be balanced against the demands of the court's calendar and other considerations
• stating that a criminal defendant’s constitutional right to counsel of choice “may be balanced against the demands of the court’s calendar, among other issues”
• explaining that summary denial of defendant's request for an adjournment to obtain counsel of choice amounts to structural error and requires a new trial
• finding denial of continuance to allow defendant to retain counsel of choice was subject to abuse of discretion standard
• in which the Court ruled that a trial court's summary and baseless denial of an adjournment—in that case to retain private counsel rather than change counsel mid-trial—constituted a \structural error\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).