Abstract

Originating in Texas, this case of the sleeping lawyer captured the public imagination at a time when Texas's prolific execution schedule was becoming an issue in the 2000 Presidential election.' Late in the appeals process Burdine argued that because his court-appointed counsel slept during portions of the trial his right to counsel had been denied. A panel of the Fifth Circuit that originally rebuffed this argument was overturned by an en banc rehearing. This last opinion intertwined the Javor and Tippins tests, rendering unclear which test the Fifth Circuit has adopted.

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

Winter 2001

Notes/Citation Information

James M. Donovan, Casenote: Burdine v. Johnson -- To Sleep, Perchance to Get a New Trial, 47(4) Loyola L. Rev. 1585-1603 (2001).

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.