Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Pro se legal representation (/ ˌ p r oʊ ˈ s iː / or / ˌ p r oʊ ˈ s eɪ /) means to argue on one's own behalf in a legal proceeding, as a defendant or plaintiff in civil cases, or a defendant in criminal cases, rather than have representation from counsel or an attorney. The term pro se comes from Latin pro se, meaning "for oneself" or ...
California Court of Appeals, 528 U.S. 152 (2000), the Supreme Court ruled the right to pro se representation did not apply to appellate courts. In Indiana v. Edwards, 554 U.S. 164 (2008), the Court ruled that a criminal defendant could be simultaneously competent to stand trial and yet not competent to represent himself. The Court ultimately ...
Self-representation includes certain specific rights for a defendant to have his opinion heard. "The pro se defendant must be allowed to control the organization and content of his own defense, to make motions, to argue points of law, to participate in voir dire, to question witnesses, and to address the court and the jury at appropriate points ...
Representing oneself, without counsel. Also known as pro per representation. / ˌ p r oʊ ˈ s iː, ˌ p r oʊ ˈ s eɪ / pro tanto: for so much A partial payment of an award or claim, based on the defendant's ability to pay. pro tem: abbreviation of pro tempore, meaning "for the time being" Something, such as an office held, that is temporary ...
Court of Appeal of California, 528 U.S. 152 (2000), the Supreme Court ruled the right to pro se representation did not apply to appellate courts. In Indiana v. Edwards, 554 U.S. 164 (2008), the Court ruled that a criminal defendant could be simultaneously competent to stand trial, but not competent to represent himself. In Bounds v.
California (1975), the Court held that a criminal defendant has the right to knowingly and voluntarily opt for pro se representation at trial. [137] This right is not per se violated by the appointment of standby counsel. [138] There is no constitutional right to self-representation on appeal. [139]
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis explained at a press conference following the 2022 indictment: “RICO is a tool that allows a prosecutor’s office and law enforcement to tell the ...
Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that criminal defendants have a constitutional right to refuse counsel and represent themselves in state criminal proceedings.