VITORATOS

v.

MAXWELL, WARDEN

Citator

Cited By

• Gilmore v. Armontrout, 861 F.2d 1061 (8th Cir. 1988)
  …not at an arraignment proceeding governed by a state law which provided that any uncounselled plea or waiver of rights was subject to withdrawal after the appointment of counsel. Vitoratos v. Maxwell, 351 F. 2d 217, 221 (6th Cir.1965), cert. denied, 383 U.S. 105, 86 S.Ct. 718, 15 L.Ed.2d 618 (1966). Applying these principles, this court held in McClain v. Swenson, 435 F. 2d 327, 330 (8th Cir.1970), that in Missouri, the absence of counsel at arraignment is not per se a violation of the sixth amendment unle…
• Bethel Raymond Fairris v. Beto, 446 F.2d 1290 (5th Cir. 1971)
  …his specific factual setting counsel is not required by due process of law standards. The sentencing was of a purely mechanical nature, carrying out the mandates of the jury. See Vitoratos v. Maxwell, 351 F. 2d 217 (6th Cir. 1965), appeal dismissed, 383 U.S. 105, 86 S.Ct. 718, 15 L.Ed.2d 618 (1966); Williams v. Beto, 354 F. 2d 698 (5th Cir. 1965). Petitioner has not shown how he was prejudiced by the lack of counsel, nor could he from the facts set out herein. The decision of Mempa v. Rhay, 389 U.S. 128, 88…
• Bryant v. Moore, 438 F.2d 1230 (1st Cir. 1971)
  …l could not have enabled him to save rights which might have been prejudiced for want of assistance. We are entirely unable to think of any reason why the defendant was prejudiced. Cf., Vitoratos v. Maxwell, 6 Cir., 1965, 351 F. 2d 217, cert. denied 383 U.S. 105, 86 S.Ct. 718, 15 L.Ed.2d 618. Defendant could not even have had the benefit of counsel’s advice with regard to a prompt appeal, as no appeal lay from the increase in sentence. If, conceivably, defendant had some extraordinary rights, they could be…