CRIMINAL LAW-INCOMPETENCE OF DEFENSE COUNSEL AS GROUND FOR NEW TRIAL

Authors

Irving Slifkin, University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Abstract

To represent the defendant, accused of robbery, the court at public expense, appointed an attorney, designated the "public defender." After conviction, the defendant, by another attorney, petitioned for a writ of error coram nobis on the ground that his attorney had made only a perfunctory defense because of his incompetence and negligence. The petition having been denied in the circuit court, the defendant appealed to the Indiana Supreme Court. Held, affirmed. When the record shows no incompetence or negligence on the part of the defense counsel prejudicial to the accused, a writ of error coram nobis will not be granted. Fluty v. State, (Ind. 1947) 71 N.E. (2d) 565.

Recommended Citation

Irving Slifkin, CRIMINAL LAW-INCOMPETENCE OF DEFENSE COUNSEL AS GROUND FOR NEW TRIAL, 45 Mich. L. Rev. 1049 (1947).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol45/iss8/9