Legal Opinion · Dissent

Crawford v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided November 27, 1968No. 41466Published

1Dissent

*150DISSENTING OPINION

ONION, Judge.

This case presents the question of the retroactivity of the holding in Mempa v. Rhay (Walkling v. Washington), 389 U.S. 128, 88 S.Ct. 254, 19 L.Ed.2d 336. In Mem-pa, which involved the revocation of probation in the State of Washington, the United States Supreme Court held that the appointment of counsel for an indigent is required at every stage of a criminal proceeding where substantial rights may be affected, and as a matter of federal constitutional law, a lawyer must be afforded such accused at a proceeding for revocation of probation or deferred sentencing.

2Cases cited70 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  5. Ex Parte YoungCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1967

65 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