Smith v. Grams

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that appellant’s attempt to appeal to Supreme Court did not destroy jurisdiction in court of appeals
• construing a pro se habeas petitioner’s letter as a timely notice of appeal even though it incorrectly named the Supreme Court, rather than the Seventh Circuit, as the reviewing court
• construing a pro se habeas petitioner’s letter as a timely notice of appeal even though it incorrectly named the Supreme Court, rather than the Seventh Circuit, as the reviewing court
• “When a party proceeds pro se,... we will, if possible, liberally construe his actions to find Rule 3’s requirements satisfied.”
• waiver of right to counsel held not voluntary and knowing where defendant terminated counsel and requested another attorney, but the trial court would allow delay and appointment only upon waiver of speedy trial right
• con struing pro se motion naming parties and order being appealed as functional equivalent

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).