Legal Opinion

Spaulding v. Taylor

District Court, D. Kansas

Decided October 6, 1964No. 3678 H.CPublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WESLEY E. BROWN, District Judge.

This is a habeas corpus action. The sole question to be determined by this court is whether or not the refusal to appoint an attorney to represent an indigent defendant on appeal constitutes a denial of due process which would warrant the release of the petitioner. The question involves the retroactive application of Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353, 83 S.Ct. 814, 9 L.Ed.2d 811 (1963). For the reasons hereinafter set forth we hold that the petitioner is entitled to release.

Spaulding, the petitioner, presented his present petition for a writ of habeas corpus…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Fay v. NoiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Douglas v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. Sanders v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  4. Gaitan v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1963
  5. Travis O. Spaulding v. J.C. Taylor, Warden, U.S. PenitentiaryCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1964

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Baggett v. WainwrightSupreme Court of Florida · 1969
  2. Spaulding v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Barnes v. StateSupreme Court of Kansas · 1969
  4. Donnell v. SwensonDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1966
  5. Peterson v. State of MissouriDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1973

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API