Henkel v. Bradshaw
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtDenecke, J.
The question is whether or not the petitioner is entitled to have legal counsel furnished by the state to represent him in a proceeding in which petitioner has been ordered to show cause why he should not be held in contempt for failure to make court-ordered support payments for his child.
The petitioner appeared before the respondent circuit judge in response to a bench warrant for arrest and an order requiring him to appear to show cause why he should not be held in contempt. Petitioner moved the court to determine his financial status and, if he were found to be indigent, to appoint counsel…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- DiBella v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- State Ex Rel. Ricco v. BiggsOregon Supreme Court · 1953
- State Ex Rel. Maizels v. JubaOregon Supreme Court · 1969
- Ter Har v. BackusOregon Supreme Court · 1970
- State Ex. Rel. Knapp v. SloperOregon Supreme Court · 1970
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- George Edward Henkel v. The Honorable Winston L. Bradshaw, Circuit Court Judge of the Fifth Judicial District of the State of OregonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
- State Ex Rel. Automotive Emporium, Inc. v. MurchisonOregon Supreme Court · 1980
- State Ex Rel. LeVasseur v. MertenOregon Supreme Court · 1984
- Nielson v. BrysonOregon Supreme Court · 1970
- Nielson v. BrysonOregon Supreme Court · 1970
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.