Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Wilde Vs. Wyoming

Wilde vs Wyoming

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1960
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/99978

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
362 U.S. 607
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Wilde

Respondent

Wyoming

Excerpt

wilde v. wyoming - 362 u.s. 607 (1960) u.s. supreme court wilde v. wyoming, 362 u.s. 607 (1960) wilde v. wyoming no. 645, misc. decided may 16,1960 362 u.s. 607 on petition for writ of certiorari to the supreme court of wyoming syllabus certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded for hearing on petitioner's allegations in his petition for writ of habeas corpus that he "had no counsel present" when he pleaded guilty to second-degree murder and that the prosecutor suppressed testimony favorable to petitioner. per curiam. the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. in petitions for writ of habeas corpus, filed with the second judicial district court of the state of wyoming and with the wyoming supreme court, the petitioner alleged, among other grounds for relief, that his plea of guilty to second degree murder in december, 1945, upon which he received a life sentence, was induced when he "had no counsel present" and that the prosecutor wilfully suppressed the testimony of two eyewitnesses to the alleged crime which would have exonerated the petitioner. it does not appear from the record that an adequate hearing on these allegations was held in the district court, or any hearing of any nature in, or by direction of, the supreme court. we find nothing in our examination of the record to justify the denial of hearing on these allegations. the judgment is therefore vacated, and the case is remanded for a hearing thereon. pennsylvania ex rel. herman v. claudy, 350 u. s. 116 ; sublett v. adams, 362 u. s. 143 .

Full Judgment

Wilde v. Wyoming - 362 U.S. 607 (1960)
U.S. Supreme Court Wilde v. Wyoming, 362 U.S. 607 (1960)

Wilde v. Wyoming

No. 645, Misc.

Decided May 16,1960

362 U.S. 607

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE

SUPREME COURT OF WYOMING

SYLLABUS

Certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded for hearing on petitioner's allegations in his petition for writ of habeas corpus that he "had no counsel present" when he pleaded guilty to second-degree murder and that the prosecutor suppressed testimony favorable to petitioner.

PER CURIAM.

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. In petitions for writ of habeas corpus, filed with the Second Judicial District Court of the State of Wyoming and with the Wyoming Supreme Court, the petitioner alleged, among other grounds for relief, that his plea of guilty to second degree murder in December, 1945, upon which he received a life sentence, was induced when he "had no counsel present" and that the prosecutor wilfully suppressed the testimony of two eyewitnesses to the alleged crime which would have exonerated the petitioner. It does not appear from the record that an adequate hearing on these allegations was held in the District Court, or any hearing of any nature in, or by direction of, the Supreme Court. We find nothing in our examination of the record to justify the denial of hearing on these allegations. The judgment is therefore vacated, and the case is remanded for a hearing thereon. Pennsylvania ex rel. Herman v. Claudy, 350 U. S. 116 ; Sublett v. Adams, 362 U. S. 143 .

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial