Attorneys-at-Law - State v. Bishop: Joint Representation of Criminal Codefendants

No Thumbnail Available
Authors
Maliham Nikki Calvano
Issue Date
1982
Type
Journal Article
Language
Keywords
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Alternative Title
Abstract
INTRODUCTION |In State v. Bishop, the Nebraska Supreme Court confronted the issue of conflicts of interest in joint representation of criminal codefendants. The court set guidelines to determine the existence of a conflict of interest and set the standard by which a criminal proceeding can be set aside for violation of the sixth amendment. The court established the standard that conflicts of interest must be proven from trial evidence to have actually existed and adversely affected the results of the case. |This article will discuss the background and nature of joint representation of criminal defendants, and the two theories concerning the standard of proof required to establish a conflict of interest. The United States Supreme Court enunciated the first theory in Holloway v. Arkansas. It held that "mere existence" of joint representation creates the presumption of prejudice. In Cuyler v. Sullivan, the Court stated the second theory; the defendant must show the existence of an "actual conflict" which adversely affected the attorney's performance and the case result...
Description
Citation
15 Creighton L. Rev. 138 (1981-1982)
Publisher
Creighton University School of Law
License
Journal
Volume
Issue
PubMed ID
DOI
ISSN
EISSN