Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States
Ellis v. United States
356 U.S. 674
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1958-05-26
- Topic
- general
How later courts describe this case
- explaining that counsel may ask to withdraw, if after a conscientious investigation, he is convinced that client’s appeal is frivolous, and court may grant request, if satisfied that counsel has diligently investigated possible grounds of appeal and agrees with counsel’s evaluation of case
- noting revocation of in forma 6 pauperis status is appropriate where the district court finds the appeal to be frivolous
- appellate counsel could withdraw only if withdrawing counsel concluded the appeal were frivolous and then only if the court agreed the appeal were indeed frivolous
- revocation of forma pauperis status is appropriate where the district court 2 find the appeal to be frivolous
- revocation of forma pauperis status is appropriate where district court finds the 9 appeal to be frivolous
- In the absence of improper motive, applicant's good faith is established by the presentation of any issue that is not plainly frivolous
- "[W]e hold that the right to counsel in termination of parental right . . . proceedings includes the right to effective assistance and requires a means of vindicating that right."
- counsel’s leave to withdraw may be granted and in forma pau-peris defendant’s leave to appeal may be denied “[i]f the court is satisfied that counsel has diligently investigated the possible grounds of appeal”
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Ellis v. United States. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 420 opinions
Headnotes
- Criminal Law & Procedure — Appeals The only statutory requirement for allowing an indigent's appeal is the applicant's good faith; absent some evident improper motive, good faith is established by presenting any issue that is not plainly frivolous, and the good-faith standard must not be converted into a requirement of a preliminary showing of any particular degree of merit. 28 U.S.C. § 1915; Farley v. United States, 354 U.S. 521
- Criminal Law & Procedure — Appeals An indigent's request for leave to appeal in forma pauperis must be granted unless the issues raised are so frivolous that the appeal would be dismissed if brought by a nonindigent litigant. Fed. Rules Crim. Proc. 39(a)
- Criminal Law & Procedure — Right to Counsel Allowance of an appeal ordinarily should not be denied until an indigent has had adequate representation by counsel, and representation in the role of an advocate is required rather than representation merely in the role of amicus curiae. Johnson v. United States, 352 U.S. 565
- Criminal Law & Procedure — Withdrawal of Appointed Counsel Appointed counsel who is convinced, after conscientious investigation, that the appeal is frivolous may ask to withdraw on that account; if the court is satisfied that counsel has diligently investigated the possible grounds of appeal and agrees with counsel's evaluation, leave to withdraw may be allowed and leave to appeal may be denied.
The petition for writ of certiorari is granted, as is leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
The Court of Appeals denied petitioner leave to appeal in forma pauperis a conviction for housebreaking and larceny. 101 U. S. App. D. C. 386, 249 F. 2d 478. The Solicitor General concedes that leave to appeal should have been allowed unless petitioner’s contentions on the merits were frivolous. The only statutory requirement for the allowance of an indigent’s appeal is the applicant’s “good faith.” 28 U. S. C. § 1915. In the absence of some evident improper motive, the applicant’s good faith is established by the presentation of any issue that is not plainly frivolous. Farley v. United States, 354 U. S. 521. The good-faith test must not be converted *675 into a requirement of a preliminary showing of any particular degree of merit. Unless the issues raised are so frivolous that the appeal would be dismissed in the case of a nonindigent litigant, Fed. Rules Crim. Proc. 39 (a), the request of an indigent for leave to appeal in forma pauperis must be allowed.
Normally, allowance of an appeal should not be denied until an indigent has had adequate representation by counsel. Johnson v. United States, 352 U. S. 565. In this case, it appears that the two attorneys appointed by the Court of Appeals, performed essentially the role of amici curiae. But representation in the role of an advocate is required.. If counsel is convinced, after conscientious investigation, that the appeal is frivolous, of course, he may ask to withdraw on that account. If the court is satisfied that counsel has diligently investigated the possible grounds of appeal, and agrees with counsel’s evaluation of the case, then leave to withdraw may be allowed and leave to appeal may be denied. In this case, the Solicitor General concedes, and after examining the record we agree, that the issue presented — probable cause to arrest — is not one that “can necessarily be characterized as frivolous.” Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated, and the case is remanded for reconsideration in light of this opinion.