Halbert v. Michigan
United States Supreme Court
545 U.S. 605 (2005)
Halbert (plaintiff) pled nolo contendre to two counts of criminal sexual conduct and was convicted on both counts. In Michigan, a defendant convicted by a plea of guilty or nolo contendre must apply for leave to appeal to the Michigan Court of Appeals. Halbert asked for a lawyer to help him apply for leave to appeal. The trial court and appellate court denied Halbert’s request for appointed counsel. The Michigan Supreme Court declined review. The Supreme Court granted certiorari. Halbert argued that the denial of his request for appointed counsel violated the Due Process of the Fourteenth Amendment and Equal Protection Clauses. The state of Michigan (defendant) argued that Halbert was not entitled to appointed counsel because appeal to the Michigan Court of Appeals was discretionary.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Ginsburg, J.)
Dissent (Thomas, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 705,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 705,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,300 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.