Citation network
M. L. B. vs. S. L. J.
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Oct 07, 1996
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
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
is at stake, Santosky v. KramerSearch
-
Just as a State may not block an indigent petty offender's access to an appeal afforded others, see Mayer v. ChicagoSearch
-
its parental termination decree. Pp. 110-128. (a) The foundation case in the relevant line of decisions is Griffin v. IllinoisSearch
-
to counsel at state expense does not extend to nonfelony trials if no term of imprisonment is actually imposed. Scott v. IllinoisSearch
-
provide access to its judicial processes without regard to a party's ability to pay court fees. See, e. g., Boddie v. ConnecticutSearch
-
the general rule, the Court has refused to extend Griffin to the broad array of civil cases. See United States v. KrasSearch
-
Lassiter v. DepartmentSearch
-
is not routinely required by the Constitution, but should be determined on a case-by-case basis), and Santosky v. KramerSearch
-
with Griffin and running through Mayer, reflect both equal protection and due process concerns. See Ross v. MoffittSearch
-
political processes as voters and candidates cannot be limited to those who can pay for a license. See, e. g., Harper v. VirginiaSearch
-
has held that government need not provide funds so that people can exercise even fundamental rights, see, e. g., Lyng v. AutomobileSearch
-
case with Mayer, not with Ortwein or Kras. Also rejected is respondents' suggestion that Washington v. DavisSearch
-
That this Court has not so conceived the meaning and effect of Washington v. DavisSearch
-
U. S., at 17, n. 11, and explained in Williams v. IllinoisSearch
-
hold that, just as a State may not block an indigent petty offender's access to an appeal afforded others, see Mayer v. ChicagoSearch
-
Id., at 23. See also Ross v. MoffittSearch
-
line of decisions regarding an indigent defendant's access to appellate review of a conviction,4 we said in Rinaldi v. YeagerSearch
-
Griffin's principle has not been confined to cases in which imprisonment is at stake. The key case is Mayer v. ChicagoSearch
-
evidence to convict. The State provided free transcripts for indigent appellants 4 See, e. g., Williams v. OklahomaSearch
-
Long v. DistrictSearch
-
requirement that a State provide a full trial transcript to an indigent defendant pursuing an appeal. See Griffin v. IllinoisSearch
-
In Draper v. WashingtonSearch
-
see also Mayer v. ChicagoSearch
-
is less encompassing. A State must provide trial counsel for an indigent defendant charged with a felony, Gideon v. WainwrightSearch
-
but that right does not extend to nonfelony trials if no term of imprisonment is actually imposed, Scott v. IllinoisSearch
-
to provide appellate counsel to poor defendants faced with incarceration applies to appeals of right. Douglas v. CaliforniaSearch
-
U. S. 353 , 357 (1963). In Ross v. MoffittSearch
-
State must provide access to its judicial processes without regard to a party's ability to pay court fees. In Boddie v. ConnecticutSearch
-
see also Little v. StreaterSearch
-
sought by an indigent defendant to enable him to contest a paternity suit). Soon after Boddie, in Lindsey v. NormetSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial