Stearnes v. Clinton

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that trial court abused its discretion by replacing court-appointed counsel during trial over counsel’s and defendant’s objections
• holding that it was error to discharge appointed counsel on the ground that he tried to interview a witness, which was against the District Attorney’s rule, which “is tenuous and in actuality is a legal nullity”
• holding -5- that attorney has duty to interview potential witnesses and trial judge lacked authority to remove defense counsel from case for interviewing witness without permission of the DA’s Office
• granting mandamus relief in case where trial court removed defendant’s appointed counsel without authority to do so
• Using “the appellate process in this situation to correct this particular ill would be too burdensome and would only aggravate the harm and most likely would result in a new trial compelling relator to again endure a trip through the system.”
• Using “the appellate process in this situation to correct this particular ill would be too burdensome and would only aggravate the harm and most likely would result in a new trial compelling relator to again endure a trip through the 8 system.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).