Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Hardy Vs. United States

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jan 06, 1964

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, 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

42 entries 2 linked 40 unlinked
Show
  1. GriffIn Vs. Illinois US Supreme Court · Apr 23, 1956
  2. Draper Vs. Washington US Supreme Court · Mar 18, 1963
  3. Hardy v. United
    Search
  4. States - 375 U.S. 277 (1964) U.S. Supreme Court Hardy v. United
    Search
  5. States, 375 U.S. 277 (1964) Hardy v. United
    Search
  6. leave to appeal in forma pauperis. The Court of Appeals, although empowered to allow the appeal ( Coppedge v. United
    Search
  7. formulated by the indigent defendant pro se. See Ingram v. United
    Search
  8. on certiorari. 373 U.S. 902. We deal with the federal system, where the appeal is a matter of right ( Coppedge v. United
    Search
  9. Johnson v. United
    Search
  10. gets, at public expense, as a minimum, the transcript which is relevant to the points of error assigned. Coppedge v. United
    Search
  11. Ingram v. United
    Search
  12. Page 375 U. S. 281 The duty of counsel on appeal, as we noted in Ellis v. United
    Search
  13. allowance of an appeal should not be denied until an indigent has had adequate representation by counsel. Johnson v. United
    Search
  14. see no escape from the conclusion that, either where the requirements of a nonfrivolous appeal prescribed by Coppedge v. United
    Search
  15. sought to be made, and where counsel on appeal was not counsel at the trial, the requirements placed on him by Ellis v. United
    Search
  16. that the case presents a nonfrivolous issue. Coppedge v. United
    Search
  17. made by the defendant in his pro se application. Ingram v. United
    Search
  18. Ellis v. United
    Search
  19. Coppedge v. United
    Search
  20. See Pannell v. United
    Search
  21. Tatum v. United
    Search
  22. Durham v. United
    Search
  23. United States v. Currens
    Search
  24. McDonald v. United
    Search
  25. Miller v. United
    Search
  26. cannot afford to purchase them would seem to be entirely consistent with the spirit of our recent decision in Bartone v. United
    Search
  27. identical today, but the Court's interpretations have stripped them of the apparent congressional meaning. In Johnson v. United
    Search
  28. At 352 U. S. 566 . In Farley v. United
    Search
  29. to justify the conviction, and this Court required a transcript to be furnished on that point. A year later, in Ellis v. United
    Search
  30. the question of probable cause raised by petitioner could not necessarily be called frivolous. In 1962, in Coppedge v. United
    Search
  31. a free transcript simply because those economically better situated can obtain their transcripts at will. See Johnson v. United
    Search
  32. Eskridge v. Washington
    Search
  33. hesitate to promulgate blanket requirements on this subject based largely upon theoretical considerations. Cf. Sanders v. United
    Search
  34. remanding it to the Court of Appeals for further consideration in light of that court's subsequent decision in Ingram v. United
    Search
  35. U.S. Supreme Court Hardy v. United
    Search
  36. See Ingram v. United
    Search
  37. Tatum v. United
    Search
  38. Bartone v. United
    Search
  39. In Johnson v. United
    Search
  40. In Farley v. United
    Search
  41. See Johnson v. United
    Search
  42. Cf. Sanders v. United
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial