Red Dog v. Delaware
Delaware Supreme Court
625 A.2d 245 (1993)
- Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Facts
James Red Dog was sentenced to execution for murder, kidnapping, and rape. A week before his execution, the state public defenders’ office requested a stay without Red Dog’s authorization. The court denied the stay, and the public defenders appealed, again without Red Dog’s approval. Red Dog had repeatedly and consistently said and written he did not want either a stay or any further appeals as disputing his death sentence “would violate his warrior’s code.” The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed denial of the stay, reasoning that the public defenders lacked standing to request the stay against Red Dog’s directions absent mental incompetence, and affirmed Red Dog’s competency. The public defenders were then directed to explain why the court should not sanction them for their actions. The public defenders filed responses defending their actions as within the bounds of professional responsibility given the exigencies of representing someone facing imminent execution.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
