Legal Opinion

Jolly v. Wright

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 6, 1980No. 22PublishedCited by 74 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HUSKINS, Justice.

The sole question presented for review is whether an indigent defendant has a statutory or constitutional right to be represented by appointed counsel in civil contempt proceedings brought to compel compliance with outstanding child support orders.

Defendant asserts both a statutory and constitutional entitlement to appointed counsel. He relies on G.S. 7A-451(a)(l), the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and the Law of the Land provisions in Article I, Section 19 of the North Carolina Constitution.

We turn first to defendant’s…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. Gagnon v. ScarpelliSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  4. Powell v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  5. Argersinger v. HamlinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972

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

3Cited by74 opinions

  1. Burgess v. Your House of Raleigh, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
  2. Jerry Parker, Jr. v. Kenneth TurnerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1980
  3. State v. PerrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  4. Donald A. Ridgway v. T.L. Baker, Potter County SheriffCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983
  5. Rutherford v. KatzenbergerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1983

69 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