Holbert v. Gladden
Oregon Supreme Court
1DissentO’Connell, J.
I disagree with the majority’s statement that “the basic right involved in this case is the right to counsel on appeal established in Douglas v. California.” I further disagree with the conclusion that Anders v. California, 386 US 738, 87 S Ct 1396, 18 L ed2d 493 (1967) should be applied retrospectively.①
Douglas v. California, 372 US 353, 83 S Ct 814, 9 L ed2d 811 (1963) held that an indigent defendant was entitled under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to have counsel appointed to prosecute his appeal and that a review of the record by the state appellate court for…
Also in this document: Concurring in part, dissenting in part.
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Douglas v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Johnson v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Linkletter v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Tehan v. United States Ex Rel. ShottSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.