Stinnett v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that a trial court incorrectly advised a defendant in stating that if the defendant elected self-representation at a suppression hearing, he could not change his mind and be represented at trial
• \Faretta does not entitle a defendant to `hybrid' representation; there is no constitutional right of a defendant `to choreograph special appearances by counsel.'\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Logan v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2003-04-17· cited 223×
• Brown v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2010-09-23· cited 13×

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Faretta v. California
  Supreme Court· 1975-06-30· cited 11,585×
• McKaskle v. Wiggins
  Supreme Court· 1984-01-23· cited 2,288×
• William Howard Cross, Sr. v. United States
  Eleventh Circuit· 1990-02-12· cited 164×
• Kehoe v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1988-03-10· cited 133×
• State v. Cappetta
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1968-12-10· cited 42×
• Smith v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1984-01-25· cited 32×
• Sheppard v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1980-12-17· cited 29×
• McCargo v. Maryland
  Supreme Court· 1969-04-28· cited 16×
• BREVARD COUNTY BD. OF COM'RS v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1987-10-20· cited 10×
• Frazier v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1984-06-21· cited 8×
• Schafer v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1984-11-23· cited 7×
• Spadaro v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1989-03-10· cited 5×
• Hall v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1986-08-14· cited 1×