Access to Courts: court held a state must provide a transcript or its Griffin v Illinois: equivalent to an indigent criminal defendant appealing a conviction on nonfederal grounds Courts cannot discriminate on account of poverty court extended Griffin by holding that a state Douglas v California: must appoint counsel for an indigent defendant for the first appeal from a criminal conviction, but only the first appeal refused to extend Douglas to require provisions of Ross v Moffit: counsel in discretionary appeals, the guarantee to equal protection does not require absolute equality but assurances that have an “indigents adequate opportunity to present their claims fairly within the adversarial system” held unconstitutional Michigan’s practice of Halbert v Michigan: denying appointed appellate court counsel to indigents convicted by guilty or nolo contendere pleas Court revisited the line distinguishing Douglas from Ross, held Douglas provided the controlling instruction, a defendant who pleads guilty or nolo contendere in a Michigan court does not thereby forfeit all opportunity for appellate review Divorce: Boddie v CT: Facts: indigent welfare recipients who sought to file divorce actions in the state courts but were unable to pay the required court fees and costs for services of process Holding: relied on DP, given the basic position of the marriage relationship in society and states monopolization of the means for dissolving the marriage, due process prohibits states from denying access to courts solely because of inability to pay Welfare and bankruptcy: Facts: indigent challenged $50 filing fee United States v Kras - requirement in voluntary bankruptcy proceedings Holding: bankruptcy is sufficiently distinguishable from divorce, bankruptcy did not rise to the fundamental level of divorce the interest in welfare payments, like that Ortwein v Schwab – in a bankruptcy discharge, far less constitutional “has significance” than the interest of Boddie Paternity: court held that DP entitled an indigent Little v Streater – defendant in a paternity action to state-subsidized blood grouping tests, unique quality of blood grouping tests as source of exculpatory evidence and states prominent role in litigation M.L.B. v S.L.J.: Facts: The Petitioner, M.L.B. (Petitioner), lost custody of her children and cannot afford to appeal the decision. She argues that such a fundamental right requires the State to pay for the costs of her appeal.
Access to Courts: Griffin v Illinois: court held a state must provide a transcript or its equivalent to an indigent criminal defendant appealing a conviction on nonfederal grounds Courts cannot discriminate on account of poverty Douglas v California: court extended Griffin by holding that a state must appoint counsel for an indigent defendant for the first appeal from a criminal conviction, but only the first appeal Ross v Moffit: refused to extend Douglas to require provisions of counsel in discretionary appeals, the guarantee to equal protection does not require absolute equality but assurances that “indigents have an adequate opportunity to present their claims fairly within the adversarial system” Halbert v Michigan: held unconstitutional Michigan’s practice of denying appointed appellate court counsel to indigents convicted by guilty or nolo contendere pleas Court revisited the line distinguishing Douglas from Ross, held Douglas provided the controlling instruction, a defendant who pleads guilty or nolo contendere in a Michigan court does not thereby forfeit all opportunity for appellate review Divorce: Boddie v CT: Facts: indigent welfare recipients who sought to file divorce actions in the state courts but were unable to pay the required court fees and costs for services of process Holding: relied on DP, given the basic position of the marriage relationship in society and states monopolization of the means for dissolving the marriage, due process prohibits states from denying access to courts solely because of inability to pay Welfare and bankruptcy: United States v Kras - Facts: indigent challenged $50 filing fee requirement in voluntary bankruptcy proceedings Holding: bankruptcy is sufficiently distinguishable from divorce, bankruptcy did not rise to the fundamental level of divorce Ortwein v Schwab – the interest in welfare payments, like that in a bankruptcy discharge, “has far less constitutional significance” than the interest of Boddie Paternity: Little v Streater – court held that DP entitled an indigent defendant in a paternity action to state-subsidized blood grouping tests, unique quality of blood grouping tests as source of exculpatory evidence and states prominent role in litigation M.L.B. v S.L.J.: Facts: The Petitioner, M.L.B. (Petitioner), lost custody of her children and cannot afford to appeal the decision. She argues that such a fundamental right requires the State to pay for the costs of her appeal.
chandlerconlawspring2014.docx