In Kowalski v. Tesmer, the Supreme Court held that attorneys lack standing to assert the rights of indigent criminal defendants.1t The Court's application of its prudential rules of standing presents great concern, as it leaves thirty years of precedent in doubt. This Note examines the parameters of the Court's prudential standing requirements and the great shift in thirdparty standing after Kowalski.1

Included in

Law Commons



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.