Poindexter v. State
Decision Date | 07 January 1946 |
Citation | 191 S.W.2d 445,183 Tenn. 193 |
Parties | POINDEXTER v. STATE. |
Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Error to Criminal Court, Montgomery County; John T. Cunningham Judge.
Gus Poindexter was convicted of murder in the first degree, and he brings error.
Reversed and remanded for a new trial.
Ernest F. Smith, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Plaintiff in error, a nineteen year old negro boy, appeals from a conviction of murder in the first degree and a sentence of death. He appears to have shot and killed a negro girl somewhat younger than himself. Several errors are assigned but we deem it necessary only to consider the complaint that the accused did not have the benefit of the advice and assistance of counsel as secured to him by law.
By Article VI of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution and by Section 9 of Article I of our State Constitution, an accused is guaranteed the assistance of counsel in the preparation and presentation of his defense. Woods v State, 99 Tenn. 182, 185, 41 S.W. 811; State v. Poe, 76 Tenn. 647, 653, 654. It here appears, as in the Poe case above cited, that counsel was assigned by the court to represent the defendant, but not until he was brought out and arraigned for trial, which was at once proceeded with, and that they had no opportunity to consult with the defendant, or make preparations for his proper defense. The recital in the bill of exceptions shows no interval between arraignment and trial. Counsel state, however, that, in response to their request for time, they were allowed ten minutes and no more.
The following quotation from State v. Poe, supra, 76 Tenn. page 654, has direct application in the instant case:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Parsons
...VI; Tenn. Const. art. I, § 9; see Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335, 342–44, 83 S.Ct. 792, 9 L.Ed.2d 799 (1963); Poindexter v. State, 183 Tenn. 193, 191 S.W.2d 445, 445 (1946). This right is deemed so important that its wrongful deprivationresults in a structural error requiring reversal. ......
-
State v. Holmes
...372 U.S. 335, 339, 83 S.Ct. 792, 9 L.Ed.2d 799 (1963); State v. White, 114 S.W.3d 469, 475 (Tenn. 2003); Poindexter v. State, 183 Tenn. 193, 191 S.W.2d 445, 445 (1946). The United States Supreme Court has long recognized that this right is one of the constitutional safeguards "deemed necess......
-
Taylor v. State
...There is no question but that one who is under formal accusation of a felony is entitled to be represented by counsel. Poindexter v. State, 183 Tenn. 193, 191 S.W.2d 445. But in the case at bar the defendants had been apprehended and taken into custody one day prior to the signing of confes......