Citation network
Case Vs. Nebraska
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 24, 1965
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
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 336 (1965) U.S. Supreme Court Case v. NebraskaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U.S. 336 (1965) Case v. NebraskaSearch
-
of our passing upon the question. It should be pointed out, however, that, as early as 1949, this Court, in Young v. RagenSearch
-
Id. at 337 U. S. 239 . But compare Mooney v. HolohanSearch
-
Miller v. StateSearch
-
N.C. 29, 51, 74 S.E.2d 513, 528 (1953). Nebraska is the seventh State to adopt such a statute since Young v. RagenSearch
-
The petitioner entered his plea of guilty on April 18, 1963, one month after this Court's decision in Gideon v. WainwrightSearch
-
that the Court's practice has been to remit prisoners to their federal habeas corpus remedy. See, e.g., Jennings v. IllinoisSearch
-
strain on the federal writ and has brought about mounting friction between state and federal courts. See Henry v. MississippiSearch
-
that, if the evolution in the coverage of the Fourteenth Amendment and in the scope of federal habeas corpus, see Fay v. NoiaSearch
-
ventilated, making easier the task of the federal judge if the state prisoner pursued his cause further. See Townsend v. SainSearch
-
questions, because further evidentiary hearings on federal habeas corpus would, if the conditions of Townsend v. SainSearch
-
easily invoked. It should be sufficiently comprehensive to embrace all federal constitutional claims. In light of Fay v. NoiaSearch
-
supra, it should eschew rigid and technical doctrines of forfeiture, waiver, or default. See Douglas v. AlabamaSearch
-
and for compilation of a record to enable federal courts to determine the sufficiency of those hearings. Townsend v. SainSearch
-
they are made obligatory upon the States, all states, by way of the Fourteenth Amendment. For reference, see Gideon v. WainwrightSearch
-
See Jackson v. OlsonSearch
-
In addition to this concession that the State provided no remedy whatever, petitioner cites Carlsen v. StateSearch
-
from custody. That is the ultimate sanction behind the due process requirement of state corrective process. See Dowd v. CookSearch
-
corrective judicial process to remedy federal constitutional defects in their criminal prosecutions, citing Frank v. MangumSearch
-
Taylor v. AlabamaSearch
-
involving criminal convictions, petitioner cites, as other applications of the general principle, General Oil Co. v. CrainSearch
-
Kenney v. SupremeSearch
-
Ward v. BoardSearch
-
Louis & S.F. R. Co., supra, and Testa v. KattSearch
-
and for the proposition that an unconstitutional denial of counsel is a jurisdictional defect, relies on Johnson v. ZerbstSearch
-
Petitioner refers to Young v. RagenSearch
-
U.S. at 337 U. S. 239 . He also cites Jackson v. DennoSearch
-
state courts are apparently broadening existing postconviction remedies by judicial construction. See, e.g., People v. HuntleySearch
-
Banach v. BolesSearch
-
Hunt v. WardenSearch
-
C.A.4th Cir.) (discussing the expanding Maryland remedy). See also the views expressed in People v. WilsonSearch
-
Donnell v. NashSearch
-
Cobb v. BalkcomSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Case v. NebraskaSearch
-
Gideon v. WainwrightSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial