Robinson v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Robinson v. State

798 P.2d 222, 1990 WL 135811

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedSeptember 8, 1990

DocketNo. F-86-625

StatusPublished

This text of 798 P.2d 222 (Robinson v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Robinson v. State, 798 P.2d 222, 1990 WL 135811 (Okla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

E. Alvin Schay, Appellate Public Defender, has filed a motion requesting this Court to determine whether attorneys in the Appellate Public Defender System can be court appointed for the purpose of appeals remanded to the district court for post-examination competency hearings. See Thomas v. State, 777 P.2d 399 (Okl.Crim. App.1989).

Having carefully considered the application, and being fully advised in the premises, we adopt the following procedure with regard to appointment of counsel on appeals remanded for post-examination competency hearings:

1. The district court should first consider appointing the original trial counsel when possible.

2. Where the original trial counsel is not available, the district court shall have the responsibility of appointing counsel other than the Appellate Public Defender’s Office.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ Ed Parks ED PARKS, Presiding Judge

/s/ James F. Lane JAMES F. LANE, Vice Presiding Judge

/s/ Hez J. Bussey HEZ J. BUSSEY, Judge

/s/ Tom Brett TOM BRETT, Judge

/s/ Gary L. Lumpkin GARY L. LUMPKIN, Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI