Chandler v. Warden Fretag

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that denying defendant an opportunity to obtain counsel on habitual criminal charge violated due process
• holding that, because “a trial on a charge of being a habitual criminal is such a serious one (Chandler v. Fretag, 348 U.S. 3, 75 S.Ct. 1, 99 L.Ed. 4
• holding that, because “a trial on a charge of being a habitual criminal is such a serious one (Chandler v. Fretag, 348 U.S. 3, 75 S.Ct. 1, 99 L.Ed. 4
• holding that, because “a trial on a charge of being a habitual criminal is such a serious one (Chandler v. Fretag, 348 U.S. 3, 75 S.Ct. 1, 99 L.Ed. 4
• hearing on enhancement of sentence by proof of additional fact, and right to counsel at that hearing, are both separate from rights to hearing and counsel on substantive offense
• \a defendant must be given a reasonable opportunity to employ and consult with counsel; otherwise the right to be heard by counsel would be of little worth\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).