upholding dismissal of defendant's counsel for conflict of interest and stating that "a defendant's right to counsel of choice is not absolute and must yield to the higher interest of the effective administration of the court."
Summary of this case from Birt v. MontgomeryNo. 78-1925.
October 1, 1979.
C.A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 595 F. 2d 1213.
upholding dismissal of defendant's counsel for conflict of interest and stating that "a defendant's right to counsel of choice is not absolute and must yield to the higher interest of the effective administration of the court."
Summary of this case from Birt v. Montgomeryusing plain error standard
Summary of this case from United States v. SiblaFull title:MILLER SON PAVING, INC. v. WRIGHTS-TOWN TOWNSHIP CIVIC ASSN. ET AL
Court:U.S.
Date published: Oct 1, 1979
The accepted standard for reviewing judicial disqualification decisions is to determine whether there has…
United States v. HobsonThe "abuse of discretion" standard is simply too deferential where such a fundamental constitutional right is…