Baxter v. Rose
- Decided
- May 19, 1975
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Tennessee
Cited 3,828 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- recognizing that counsel should investigate all apparently substantial defenses — Henry Zillon Felts v. State of Tennessee (2011)
- establishing that representation should be within the range of competence demanded of attorneys in criminal cases — Jerry Lee Hunter v. State of Tennessee (2012)
- establishing that representation should be within the range of competence demanded of attorneys in criminal cases — Justin Mathis v. State of Tennessee (2011)
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 HENRY, Justice.
We granted certiorari in this case to review the action of the Court of Criminal Appeals in affirming the dismissal of petitioner’s pro se petition for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing.
Our grant was for the primary purpose of clarifying the law in this jurisdiction with respect to the proper standard of competence to be applied to counsel in criminal representations, and to determine whether privately retained counsel and counsel appointed to represent the indigent are subject to the same standards.
Cite this
Baxter v. Rose, 523 S.W.2d 930 (1975)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.