KAPLAN

v.

CALIFORNIA

Citator

Cited By

• Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (U.S. 1986)
  …procedure without any explanation. When we granted certiorari, we could have — as we sometimes do — directed the parties to brief the equal protection question in addition to the Sixth Amendment question. See, e. g., Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 408 U. S. 921 (1972); Colorado v. Connelly, 474 U. S. 1050 (1986).1 Even following oral argument, we could have — as we sometimes do— directed reargument on this particular question. See, e. g., Brown v. Board of Education, 345 U. S. 972 (1953); Illinois v. Gates…
• Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778 (U.S. 1973)
  …the District Court held that revocation without a hearing and counsel was a denial of due process. 317 F. Supp. 72 (ED Wis. 1970). The Court of Appeals affirmed sub [*781] nom. Gunsolus v. Gagnon, 454 F. 2d 416 (CA7 1971), and we granted certiorari. 408 U. S. 921 (1972). II Two prior decisions set the bounds of our present inquiry. In Mempa v. Rhay, 389 U. S. 128 (1967), the Court held that a probationer is entitled to be represented by appointed counsel at a combined revocation and sentencing hearing. Rea…
• United States ex rel. Luther Miller v. Twomey, 479 F.2d 701 (7th Cir. 1973)
  …nformal.” Ibid. . There are two reasons why this is a doubtful point, neither of which involves any disagreement by this court with our prior holding in Gunsolus v. Gagnon, 454 F. 2d 416 (7th Cir. 1971), cert. granted sub nom., Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 408 U.S. 921, 92 S.Ct. 2490, 33 L.Ed.2d 331. The [*716] first, of course, is our disagreement with the proposition that whatever procedural safeguards are required for a parole (or probation) revocation hearing are also necessarily applicable to an in-prison dis…

  ← 1 / 2 →