Phillips v. United States

3 Citing cases

  1. United States v. Alessandrello

    637 F.2d 131 (3d Cir. 1980)   Cited 72 times
    Holding that absence of defendants from part of voir dire discussing trial publicity with prospective jurors was error under Rule 43

    The court held that this violation of Rule 43 was harmless error. In Phillips v. United States, 533 F.2d 369 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 924, 97 S.Ct. 324, 50 L.Ed.2d 292 (1976), the court was also faced with a claim that a defendant should have his conviction reversed on the basis that he was absent during the period in which challenges were made. While recognizing that a defendant is entitled to be present at all stages of his trial, including jury selection, the court noted that the record revealed that the defendant was present during most of the jury selection process and was only absent for approximately 10 minutes while the attorneys exercised their strikes.

  2. Crawford v. Linahan

    243 Ga. 161 (Ga. 1979)   Cited 10 times

    " (Emphasis supplied.) Phillips v. United States, 533 F.2d 369, 371 (4) (8th Cir. 1976). And see Harris v. Estelle, 487 F.2d 56, supra.

  3. State v. Samuels

    965 S.W.2d 913 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 17 times
    In State v. Samuels, 965 S.W.2d 913 (Mo.App. W.D.1998), this court extended the protection of Simmons to a conflict between the Sixth Amendment right to counsel and the Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination.

    Because the burden is so heavy, general or "naked" allegations of ineffectiveness are not sufficient. Phillips v. U.S. , 401 F. Supp. 594, 596 (1975) affirmed 533 F.2d 369 (1976), certiorari denied 429 U.S. 924 (1976). An appellant can make a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel only by specifying particular errors of trial counsel, not founded on mere inexperience, lack of time to prepare, gravity of the charges, complexity of defenses, or accessibility of witnesses to counsel.