State v. Harris

Decided 1976-10-05

Cited by 106 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

BRANCH, Justice. Defendant first contends that the trial judge erred by denying his motion for a continuance. He takes the position that the denial of his motion violated his constitutional rights of due process, confrontation of his accusers and his right to effective assistance of counsel. Ordinarily a motion for a continuance is addressed to the trial…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.