State v. Williams
Citations
- 206 Conn. App. 539
Syllabus
Convicted of the crime of sexual assault in the second degree after a trial to the court, the defendant appealed to this court, claiming that the trial court deprived him of his constitutional right to the assistance of counsel by allowing him to represent himself and thereafter abused its discretion by failing to order a competency hearing or to appoint counsel for him. The defendant had been represented by three public defenders during pretrial proceedings before two different trial judges in the several months prior to trial, when he sought to dismiss the public defenders and to represent himself. After the defendant rejected the state's offer of a plea agreement, the court canvassed him regarding his request to represent himself, and found that he knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived his right to counsel and was qualified to represent himself. None of the public defenders at any time during those proceed- ings expressed concerns to the court about the defendant's competence to stand trial or indicated that he suffered from a mental illness or incapacitation. Held: 1. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the defen- dant was competent to represent himself and that he made a knowing, voluntary and intelligent waiver of his right to counsel: a. The record supported the court's finding that the defendant was competent to waive his right to counsel and to represent himself, as he had expressed his desire to represent himself on two occasions before different judges prior to being allowed to represent himself, he was consistently able to articulate logical reasons for that desire, his responses to the court during its canvass of him showed that he compre- hended the disadvantages and dangers of representing himself, and he indicated that he understood the elements of the crime with which he was charged and the range of penalties associated with a conviction. b. Contrary to the defendant's contentions, the court's canvass of him pr
Judges: Prescott; Moll; Suarez
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
1 case in this archive cites this case.
Cites
21 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×
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court· 1963-03-18· cited 8,419×
- Dusky v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1960-04-18· cited 3,197×
- State v. GoldingSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1989-12-19· cited 2,736×
- Indiana v. EdwardsSupreme Court· 2008-06-19· cited 1,118×
- State v. KitchensSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2011-01-05· cited 242×
- United States v. John Vincent MacKovichTenth Circuit· 2000-04-25· cited 117×
- State v. ConnorSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2009-07-14· cited 66×
- State v. D'AntonioSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2005-08-02· cited 65×
- State v. T.R.D.Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2008-03-25· cited 57×
- State v. TRDSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2008-03-25· cited 56×
- State v. JonesSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2007-03-13· cited 52×
- State v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2001-05-22· cited 51×
- State v. FlanaganSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2009-09-15· cited 33×
- State v. JordanSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2012-05-29· cited 24×
- State v. DiazSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2005-08-09· cited 23×
- Lopez v. WardenSupreme Court· 2000-10-02· cited 13×
- State v. PaulinoConnecticut Appellate Court· 2011-03-01· cited 11×
- Houghtaling v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court· 2021-03-16· cited 7×
- Izzo v. QuinnConnecticut Appellate Court· 2016-11-30· cited 6×
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.