State v. Maisonet

In State v. Maisonet, the New Jersey Supreme Court considered whether the defendant was denied his constitutional right to counsel when, on the day his murder trial was set to begin, he sought an adjournment to see if he could hire a private attorney, and his request was denied. When he requested the adjournment, the … Read more

Commonwealth v. Carlson

In Commonwealth v. Carlson, prior to trial, the public defender (“PD”) filed a motion to withdraw, asserting that the defendant’s job rendered him ineligible for the PD’s services. The trial court granted the motion. Before trial, the defendant asserted that he was unable to afford counsel, but the trial court did not conduct an inquiry … Read more

Commonwealth v. Floyd

In Commonwealth v. Floyd, Appellant appealed his convictions after pleading guilty to several crimes charged on two dockets. Appellant violated the rule established in Commonwealth v. Walker, 185 A.3d 969 (Pa. 2018), by filing one notice of appeal which contained both dockets. The Pennsylvania Superior Court declined to quash the appeal, citing Commonwealth v. Larkin, … Read more

Commonwealth v. Hajdarevic

In Commonwealth v. Hajdarevic, the Superior Court held that the Confrontation Clause applies to evidence presented by the Commonwealth to establish the time of a blood draw in a DUI case because, under Section 3802 of the Motor Vehicles Code, the Commonwealth is required to prove that the defendant’s blood alcohol content within two hours … Read more

State v. Jackson

Be careful who your friends are. In State v. Jackson, the New Jersey Supreme Court handed down a significant Confrontation Clause decision. Three codefendants participated in a burglary, but one pleaded guilty and cooperated. The trial judge limited trial counsel’s ability to cross-examine the cooperator with the full extent of his exposure at sentencing. The … Read more

United States v. Wilson

After being convicted by a jury of two bank robberies, the defendants appealed their attorneys’ decisions to stipulate that the banks were federally insured and, as a result, the federal courts had jurisdiction to hear the cases. The defendants claimed that they wished to contest the case at every level and that their lawyers stipulated … Read more