green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
19.7 score
“if it is apparent to the district court that a pro se litigant has a colorable claim but lacks the capacity to present it, the court should appoint counsel to assist him.”
Treatment trajectory · 1978 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1978
2002
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited "but see"
Alfred Dufresne v. John Moran
But see United States v. Campa, 679 F.2d 1006, 1014 (1st Cir.1982) (appellant claiming ineffective assistance of counsel "bears the burden of establishing actual prejudice”) (citing United States v. Ritch, 583 F.2d 1179, 1183 (1st Cir.), cert. denied 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 463 , 58 L.Ed.2d 430 (1978)).
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Lind v. Ames
if it is apparent to the district court that a pro se litigant has a colorable claim but lacks the capacity to present it, the court should appoint counsel to assist him.
cited
Cited "see"
Smith v. Nelson
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Grant v. PETER WOLF & ASSOCIATES PC
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
TREJO-MUNOZ v. FCI BENNETTSVILLE
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Brown v. United States of America
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Reyes v. Dorchester County of South Carolina
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Garvin v. Cohen
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Brown v. Warden Barnes, FCI Bennetsville
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Hutson v. Harper
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Kennedy v. Sgt Francis
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Baccus v. State of South Carolina Criminal Justice System, The
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Martin v. Duffy
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Kennedy v. Sgt Francis
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Hillman v. Esper
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Pilcher v. Nelson
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Childress v. City of North Charleston
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Dorneanu v. Graco Inc.
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Buchanan v. JUMPSTART, INC.
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Reyes v. Dorchester County of South Carolina
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Buchanan v. JUMPSTART, INC.
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Silver v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Inc
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Allen v. United States
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir.1978) (pro se claimant’s case should not be dismissed for mislabeling pleading), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
Stevenson v. J.C. Bradford & Co. (In Re Cannon)
The Randall Court ultimately allowed the defrauded investor to recover all of his capital investment under a rescission theory, while retaining certain prior tax benefits incident to his investment, id. at 667 , 106 S.Ct. 3143 , because “[i]t is more appropriate to give the defrauded party the benefit even of windfalls than to let the fraudulent party keep them.” Id. (quoting Janigan v. Taylor, 344 F.2d 781, 786 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 879 , 86 S.Ct. 163 , 15 L.Ed.2d 120 (1965)); accord Nelson v. Serwold, 576 F.2d 1332, 1339 (9th Cir.) (allowing recovery based on fraud-feasor’…
cited
Cited "see"
Zaidi v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In re A.H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965).
cited
Cited "see"
Copperfield v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In re A.H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965).
cited
Cited "see"
Udugampola v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In re A.H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965). .
cited
Cited "see"
Allday v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In re A.H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965).
cited
Cited "see"
Schwalm v. Dalkon Shield Trust
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965).
cited
Cited "see"
Harmon v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In re A.H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965). .
cited
Cited "see"
Clawson v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In Re A.H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965). 2 .
cited
Cited "see"
Short v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In re A.H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965). .
cited
Cited "see"
Velu v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In re A.H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965).
cited
Cited "see"
Higgins v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In re A.H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965). .
cited
Cited "see"
Sherman v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In re A.H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965). .
cited
Cited "see"
Lammert v. Dalkon Shield Trust
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Suarez Corporation Industries v. Mcgraw
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir.1978) ("pleadings should not be scrutinized with such technical nicety that a meritorious claim should be defeated, and even if the claim is insufficient in substance, it may be amended to achieve justice."), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
Suarez Corp. Industries v. McGraw
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir.1978) (“pleadings should not be scrutinized with such technical nicety that a meritorious claim should be defeated, and even if the claim is insufficient in substance, it may be amended to achieve justice.”), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Briggs v. Dalkon Shield Trust
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965). .
cited
Cited "see"
Michele West & Murai West v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In re A.H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir. 1965). .
cited
Cited "see"
Goodman v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In re A.H Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir. 1965). .
cited
Cited "see"
Kelly v. Breland Insurance Trust (In re A.H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir. 1965). .
cited
Cited "see"
Fox v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In re A.H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965). .
cited
Cited "see"
Lammers v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In re A.H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965). .
cited
Cited "see"
Casey v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In re A.H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965). .
cited
Cited "see"
Barnes v. Breland Insurance Trust (In re A.H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir. 1965). .
cited
Cited "see"
Smith-Kingcade v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In re A. H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965). .
cited
Cited "see"
Bennett v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In re A.H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965). .
cited
Cited "see"
Galarneau v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In re A. H. Robins Co.)
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147 , 1151 — 52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th.
cited
Cited "see"
Kidd v. Dalkon Shield Trust
See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151-52 (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 970 , 99 S.Ct. 464 , 58 L.Ed.2d 431 (1978); Coleman v. Peyton, 340 F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir.1965).
Floyd Harris
v.
State of Oklahoma
v.
State of Oklahoma
78-5177.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 27, 1978.
439 U.S. 970
Reporter's Syllabus — editorial summary, not part of the Court's opinion
On petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
Mr. Justice BRENNAN, with whom Mr. Justice MARSHALL joins, dissenting.
Lead Opinion
Ct. Crim. App. Okla Certiorari denied.
Dissent
dissenting.
In 1971 a grocery store clerk in Tulsa, Okla., was shot and killed during the course of a robbery of the store. Petitioner has undergone two separate trials based on two separate[*971] charges arising out of this event. Petitioner was convicted of armed robbery in the District Court of Tulsa County, Case No. CRF-73-228, on -July 19, 1973. On November 21, 1973, petitioner was convicted in a second trial of the crime of felony murder, the armed robbery providing an essential element of the crime. Case No. CRF-73-227. Claiming that his rights under the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment had been violated, petitioner sought postconviction relief in the District Court of Tulsa County, Okla. This relief was denied.
Petitioner then appealed to the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, which ordered petitioner’s conviction for felony murder vacated because of the Double Jeopardy Clause. The Court stated:
“This order is made without prejudice to the trial of the said Floyd Harris on any charge of homicide which the facts and justice may warrant, not inconsistent with the views expressed by the Supreme Court of the United States in Brown v. Ohio, 432 U. S. 161, . . . and Harris v. Oklahoma, [433 U. S. 682].” Order Reversing Denial of Post-Conviction Relief, No. PC-78-93 (June 5, 1978).
Petitioner subsequently filed with the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals an application entitled Writ of Habeas Corpus or alternatively, Petition for Rehearing sua sponte, alleging that the court’s order in No. PC-78-93 was erroneous because in contravention of Harris v. Oklahoma, 433 U. S. 682 (1977). The court denied petitioner’s application, stating:
“As petitioner’s trial on the charge of Murder in the First Degree is barred solely because the arm'ed robbery for which he was previously convicted is a necessary element of the murder conviction, the holding of Harris v. Oklahoma . . . does not prevent petitioner’s trial on a lesser degree of homicide which does not require proof of the armed robbery as a necessary element.” Order Denying Relief, No. H-78-322 (July 25, 1978).
[*972] The order of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals would permit petitioner to be tried on charges arising out of the same criminal transaction as that underlying petitioner’s conviction for armed robbery. Because I continue to adhere to my view, expressed in Harris v. Oklahoma, supra, at 683 (concurring opinion), that the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment, applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, requires the prosecution in one proceeding, except in extremely limited circumstances not present here, of “all the charges against a defendant that grow out of a single criminal act, occurrence, episode, or transaction,” Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U. S. 436, 453-454 (1970) (Brennan, J., concurring), I would grant the petition for certiorari and reverse the judgment of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals in No. H-78-322. See Thompson v. Oklahoma, 429 U. S. 1053 (1977) (Brennan, J., dissenting), and cases collected therein.