State v. Knight

8 Citing cases

  1. Johnson v. State

    No. W2014-00053-CCA-R3-PC (Tenn. Crim. App. Dec. 29, 2014)   Cited 11 times
    Rejecting the petitioner's claim that he was entitled to a new evidentiary hearing due to counsel's failure to comply with Rule 28

    Crim. App. Feb. 11, 2014),perm. app. denied (Tenn. June 25, 2014) (citing State v. Knight, 770 S.W.2d 771, 775 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1988)); see also State v. Thompson, 768 S.W.2d 239, 245 (Tenn. 1989) (stating that "an accused is entitled to zealous representation by an attorney unfettered by a conflicting interest").

  2. Braddock v. State

    No. M2012-01605-CCA-R3-PC (Tenn. Crim. App. Feb. 11, 2014)   Cited 3 times

    This right contemplates that the services rendered by counsel shall be completely devoted to the interest of the accused. State v. Knight, 770 S.W.2d 771, 775 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1988). In this respect, it is unquestioned that "an accused is entitled to zealous representation by an attorney unfettered by a conflicting interest."

  3. State v. Coffelt

    No. M2005-01723-CCA-DAC-CD. (Tenn. Crim. App. Aug. 8, 2006)   Cited 5 times
    In State v. Coffelt, 2006 WL 2310597, at *1-2 (Tenn. Crim. App. Aug. 8, 2006), the panel cited Dowlen for the proposition that the Tennessee Supreme Court had approved of the procedure "by rule;" nonetheless, it noted that it was "in the unusual position of considering a delayed direct appeal at the same time as an appeal of the denial of post-conviction relief."

    The right to counsel requires complete devotion to the interest of the defendant. State v. Knight, 770 S.W.2d 771, 775 (Tenn.Crim.App. 1988). "[A] lawyer forced to represent co[-]defendants whose interests conflict cannot provide the adequate legal assistance required by the Sixth Amendment."

  4. Smith v. State

    No. W2004-02366-CCA-R3-PC (Tenn. Crim. App. Oct. 7, 2005)   Cited 6 times

    The right to counsel requires complete devotion to the interest of the defendant. State v. Knight, 770 S.W.2d 771 (Tenn.Crim.App. 1988). When counsel is unable to provide a "zealous representation . . . unfettered by conflicting interest," there has been a breach of the right to the effective assistance of counsel.

  5. Hines v. State

    No. M2004-01610-CCA-RM-PD (Tenn. Crim. App. Jul. 14, 2004)   Cited 4 times   1 Legal Analyses

    The right to counsel requires complete devotion to the interest of the defendant. State v. Knight, 770 S.W.2d 771 (Tenn.Crim.App. 1988). When counsel is unable to provide a "zealous representation . . . unfettered by conflicting interests," there has been a breach of the right to the effective assistance of counsel.

  6. Hines v. State

    No. M2002-01352-CCA-R3-PD (Tenn. Crim. App. Jan. 23, 2004)   Cited 4 times

    The right to counsel requires complete devotion to the interest of the defendant. State v. Knight, 770 S.W.2d 771 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1988). When counsel is unable to provide a "zealous representation . . . unfettered by conflicting interests," there has been a breach of the right to the effective assistance of counsel.

  7. Dawan v. State

    No. W2001-00792-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Mar. 11, 2002)   Cited 3 times

    The right to counsel requires complete devotion to the interest of the defendant. State v. Knight, 770 S.W.2d 771 (Tenn.Crim.App. 1988). When counsel is unable to provide a "zealous representation . . . unfettered by conflicting interests," there has been a breach of the right to the effective assistance of counsel.

  8. Alexander v. State

    C.C.A. No. 03C01-9903-CC-00097 (Tenn. Crim. App. Jan. 27, 2000)   Cited 1 times

    The right to counsel requires complete devotion to the interest of the defendant. State v. Knight, 770 S.W.2d 771 (Tenn.Crim.App. 1988). When counsel was unable to provide a "zealous representation . . . unfettered by conflicting interests," there has been a breach of the right to the effective assistance of counsel.