Showing posts with label UNITED STATES V. ELY 719 F.2d 902 (7th Cir.1983). Show all posts
Showing posts with label UNITED STATES V. ELY 719 F.2d 902 (7th Cir.1983). Show all posts

UNITED STATES V. ELY 719 F.2d 902 (7th Cir.1983) CASE BRIEF

UNITED STATES V. ELY
719 F.2d 902 (7th Cir.1983)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Ely (D) challenged his convictions for possession of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C.S. 841 and failure to appear in violation of 18 U.S.C.S. 3150 in a United States District Court. This was an appeal based on denial of counsel of choice.
FACTS: Ely (D) was indicted along with two other men for distributing and conspiring to distribute cocaine. D was the middleman with Dawson, his supplier, and Griswold, a dealer to whom D supplied. Griswold and Dawson pled guilty and were sentenced to 10 and 15 years respectively. Dawson moved for a reduction in sentence, that motion was denied, and he appealed. D failed to appear in court with the others and became a fugitive. They were eventually caught and D eventually received a 30-year sentence while the other two got 10 and 15 years. Ely (D) was arraigned on a criminal matter and requested court appointed counsel. The court appointed Brady. Ely stated, 'Mr. Bartley had represented business of mine at one time and I have -- I feel a more closer relationship with Mr. Bartley in understanding what is before me. . . .' Although Bartley was willing to accept the appointment and had represented other indigent criminal defendants before the district judge, the judge refused to appoint him to represent Ely: 'the Court appoints an attorney for you under the program that this Court has of attorneys on its list and in some relative degree of sequence and frequency. . . . I know that Mr. Brady is [a] thoroughly competent and experienced attorney in this Court. I don't have anything different to say about Mr. Bartley, but we cannot start the practice of allowing defendants to select attorneys to be appointed.' The trial judge refused. D appealed. D contends the judge violated his Sixth Amendment rights by denying him his counsel of choice.

ISSUE:


RULE OF LAW:


HOLDING AND DECISION:


LEGAL ANALYSIS:





Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com




© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner