Supreme Court of Delaware· 7/18/1969

Mills v. State

Citations

256 A.2d 752
1969 Del. LEXIS 297

How courts have described this case

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

“[W]e hold that the appellant was entitled to a jury trial, in accordance with the above guidelines, upon his application for release under s 4702(c).”
“A writ of habeas corpus is not available to the appellant because, as we have held, his commitment under s 4702(a) was valid; and because the statutory remedy provided by s 4702(c
“Because we find no rational justification for withholding from a s 4702 patient the safeguard of jury trial of the issue of present mental illness, we construe s 4702(c) to require jury trial of that issue.” (emphasis supplied)
“If this appears to be a strained construction of s 4702(c
“In the absence of a reasonable basis for distinction, we hold that it is a denial of equal protection of the laws to deprive a s 4702 patient of the substantial safeguards provided by s 5126 for a s 5125 patient as to release from the Hospital.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Carey, Herrmann, Wolcott

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

36 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

18 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this 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.