People v. Brown
2011 Colo. App. LEXIS 488
Colo. Ct. App.2011Background
- Brown was arrested in March 2005 and initially represented by a public defender.
- Multiple continuances were granted before trial, including due to undecided test results and a defense motion
- On February 2, 2006, Brown retained private counsel who sought a continuance to prepare, waiving speedy trial.
- The prosecutor opposed the continuance; the court declined to continue, citing readiness of the public defender and calendar concerns.
- Retained counsel later withdrew his appearance, and the case proceeded to trial with the public defender still representing Brown.
- The Supreme Court later held that denying the continuance violated Brown's Sixth Amendment right to counsel, requiring reversal and remand for retrial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether denial of a continuance to allow retained counsel to prepare violated the Sixth Amendment | Brown should have been allowed a delay to enable new counsel | Court's calendar control justifies denial to avoid delay | Yes, abuse of discretion; Sixth Amendment right violated |
| Whether the trial court properly balanced the right to counsel against court administration interests | Court failed to consider dilatory motive, availability of counsel, docket impact, and prejudice | Court reasonably weighed efficiency and administration of justice | No, court failed to perform required balancing; error reversible |
| Whether the error is structural and subject to automatic reversal | Violation is structural, not subject to harmless error analysis | Not addressed as structural error | Yes, structural error requiring reversal without prejudice showings |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, 548 U.S. 140 (2006) (Sixth Amendment right to counsel requires careful balancing with court interests)
- United States v. Cordy, 560 F.3d 808 (8th Cir. 2009) (Qualified right to counsel must not obstruct justice)
- Gandy v. Alabama, 569 F.2d 1318 (5th Cir. 1978) (Right to counsel not to delay proceedings unreasonably)
- Linton v. Perini, 656 F.2d 207 (6th Cir. 1981) (Court cannot arbitrarily deny client’s chosen counsel)
- Bentvena, 319 F.2d 916 (2d Cir. 1963) (Delay prejudice and scheduling should be weighed against rights)