No. 18-238
South Carolina v. Lamont Antonio Samuel
Tags: court-of-appeals criminal-procedure defendant-rights due-process ethics faretta-v-california judicial-conduct judicial-discretion judicial-integrity self-representation sixth-amendment unethical-conduct
Latest Conference:
2019-01-04
Question Presented (from Petition)
Did the South Carolina Supreme Court err when it held — in conflict with many federal courts of appeals — that a trial court may not deny a criminal defendant's motion to represent himself based on the "defendant's improper motive or unethical conduct."
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the South Carolina Supreme Court err when it held — in conflict with many federal courts of appeals — that a trial court may not deny a criminal defendant's motion to represent himself based on the 'defendant's improper motive or unethical conduct'
Docket Entries
2019-01-07
Petition DENIED.
2018-12-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.
2018-12-03
Reply of petitioner State of South Carolina filed.
2018-11-23
Brief of respondent Lamont Samuel in opposition filed.
2018-10-18
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including November 23, 2018.
2018-10-15
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 24, 2018 to November 23, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.
2018-09-24
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 24, 2018
2018-09-17
Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 24, 2018 to October 24, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.
2018-08-23
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 24, 2018)
Attorneys
Lamont Samuel
State of South Carolina