CHESSMAN
v.
TEETS, WARDEN
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Court granted certiorari to review whether state court proceedings to settle a trial transcript denied petitioner due process.
Petitioner's automatic appeal from a conviction was heard by the California Supreme Court based on a settled trial transcript. Petitioner alleges he w…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Due Process Of Law cases and more on FLexlaw
On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. The case is transferred to the appellate docket and set for oral argument on May 13, 1957, upon the following terms:
1. The writ of certiorari is limited to the question whether, in the circumstances of this case, the state court proceedings to settle the trial transcript, upon which petitioner’s automatic appeal from his conviction was necessarily heard by the Supreme Court of the State of California, in which trial court proceedings petitioner allegedly was not represented in person or by counsel designated by the state court in his behalf, resulted in denying petitioner due process of law, within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
2. Appearances upon the writ of certiorari will be confined to counsel for the respective parties, and their argument will be limited to the single question indicated above.
George T. Davis for petitioner. Edmund G. Brown, Attorney General of California, and Clarence A. Linn, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
3. The brief for the petitioner will be served and filed on or before April 24, 1957. The brief for the respondent will be served and filed on or before May 10, 1957. The petitioner may file a reply brief within one week after the oral argument.
The Chief Justice took no part in the consideration or decision of this application.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Chessman v. Teets, 354 U.S. 156 (U.S. 1957)…., 1956 Term.* We granted certiorari, limiting it to the question whether Chessman’s failure to be represented in person or by counsel at the settlement proceedings deprived him of due process of law, thus excluding review on the issue of fraud. See 353 U. S. 928. See the Appendix to this opinion, post, p. 173. These include many that relate to the crime of burglary, of which he was acquitted. The trial judge resolved doubts in favor of the defendant. Thus he ruled “The amendment ... is ordered as suggest…1 / 2