Supreme Court· 5/8/1967

Anders v. California

Citations

386 U.S. 738
87 S. Ct. 1396
18 L. Ed. 2d 493
1967 U.S. LEXIS 1569

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that a refusal of appointed counsel to properly pursue an appeal, coupled with the refusal of the court to appoint substitute counsel, amounted to a denial of fundamental due process
holding that an attorney who believes appeal would be frivolous must inform the court and file a brief identifying arguably appealable matters in the record
holding that “if counsel finds his case to be wholly frivolous, after a conscientious examination of it, he should advise the court and request permission to withdraw”
holding that when counsel determines that a criminal defendant’s case is “wholly frivolous,” counsel must “so advise the court and request permission to withdraw”
holding that a court reviewing an Anders brief is required to fully examine “all the proceedings”
holding that the appellant “must demonstrate that the issues are debatable among jurists of reason.” (citations omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Clark, Stewart, Black, Harlan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

At least 6,313 cases in this archive cite this case. Too many to rank, so this is a sample of 20 of them, not the most cited.

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Anders v. California

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.