United States v. Fred M. Mosely

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that a criminal defendant may not logically assert both the right to counsel and right to defend pro se
• \[T]he question whether to allow a defen- dant to participate in his own defense along with counsel in `hybrid rep- resentation' is a matter committed to the sound discretion of the trial court.\
• “ ‘The right to defend pro se and the right to counsel have been aptly described as ‘two faces of the same coin,’ in that waiver of one right constitutes a correlative assertion of the other.’ ”
• the invocation of one right constitutes a waiver of the other
• “‘The right to defend pro se and the right to counsel have been aptly described as “two faces of the same coin,” in that waiver of one right constitutes a correlative assertion of the other.’” (quoting United States v. Conder, 423 F.2d 904, 908 (6th Cir. 1970))
• a defendant is not entitled to hybrid representation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).