Stafford v. State
- Decided
- July 3, 1991
- Docket
- 1085-88
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Texas
Cited 9,170 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- concluding that an indigent defendant must be afforded new counsel if the appellate court finds arguments meritorious — Larry Allen Morgan Jr. v. State (2008)
- holding that, in Anders case, court of appeals must investigate the record and, if it finds arguable grounds for appeal, remand to trial court to appoint new counsel to present arguments court of appeals identified — Rodney Milum v. State (2015)
- stating that if court of appeals does find arguable grounds, it must then guarantee appellant’s right to counsel by ensuring that another attorney is appointed to represent appellant on appeal — Banks v. State (2009)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
OPINION ON STATE’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW McCORMICK, Presiding Judge.
Appellant, Edmond Albert Stafford, was convicted of delivery of more than 28 grams of cocaine for which punishment was assessed at 75 years’ confinement. He appealed. The First Court of Appeals in Houston reversed the conviction finding that trial and appellate counsels’ deficiencies denied appellant effective assistance of counsel.
Stafford v. State, 758 S.W.2d 663 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1988). We granted the State’s petition for discretionary review to examine the Court of Appeals’ holding. We now reverse.
Cite this
Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (1991)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.