Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States
Smith v. Crouse
378 U.S. 584
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1964-06-22
- Topic
- general
How later courts describe this case
- giving retroactivity to Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353, 83 S.Ct. 814, 9 L.Ed.2d 811 (1963)
- re Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353, 83 S.Ct. 814, 9 L.Ed.2d 811 (1963); Eskridge v. Washington State Board of Prison Terms and Paroles, 357 U.S. 214, 78 S.Ct. 1061, 2 L.Ed.2d 1269 (1958
- re Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353, 83 S.Ct. 814, 9 L.Ed.2d 811 (1963); Eskridge v. Washington State Board of Prison Terms and Paroles, 357 U.S. 214, 78 S.Ct. 1061, 2 L.Ed.2d 1269 (1958) (re Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12, 76 S.Ct. 585, 100 L.Ed. 891 (1956)
- indigent’s right to a transcript
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Smith v. Crouse. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Authority status
- pending
- Cited by
- 70 opinions
378 U.S. 584 (1964)
SMITH
No. 915, Misc.
SMITH
v.
CROUSE, WARDEN.
No. 915, Misc.
Supreme Court of United States.
Decided June 22, 1964. ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS.Petitioner pro se.
William M. Ferguson, Attorney General of Kansas, and J. Richard Foth, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is reversed. Douglas v. California, 372 U. S. 353.
MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, dissenting.
In my opinion the question whether Douglas v. California, 372 U. S. 353, should be given retroactive application is deserving of plenary consideration. Cf. my dissenting opinion in LaVallee v. Durocher, 377 U. S. 998.