Assertion: defendant | /r/HasAspect | constitutional right
Facets:
value: according to the supreme court
type: OTHER
value: in some states
type: LOCATION
Source sentences:
text: According to the Supreme Court, under what circumstances does a defendant have a Constitutional right to choose a different court-assigned attorney?
text: According to the Supreme Court, under what circumstances does a defendant have a Constitutional right to choose a different privately hired attorney?
text: Defendants in criminal cases have a constitutional right to be present at their trials.
text: In some states, the defendant has a constitutional right to be represented by counsel at arraignment.
text: Furthermore a defendant in a criminal case is entitled to a jury instruction which informs the jury that the defendant has a constitutional right to testify and that the fact that the defendant did not testify cannot be considered as evidence against him at trial.
text: The court must instruct the jury that the defendant has a constitutional right not to testify, that the choice not to testify cannot be held against the defendant, and that the defendant is presumed innocent regardless of whether he or she testifies.
text: according to the supreme court under what circumstances does a defendant have a constitutional right to choose a different court assigned attorney
text: according to the supreme court under what circumstances does a defendant have a constitutional right to choose a different privately hired attorney defendant can choose a nee attorney fir alnost any reason
text: Since the defendant has no constitutional right to discover any of the prosecution's evidence (unless it is exculpatory within the meaning of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)), it is permissible to condition his access to nonexculpatory evidence upon his turning over a list of defense witnesses.