Marvel v. United States
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM |
| Citation | Marvel v. United States, 380 U.S. 262, 85 S.Ct. 953, 13 L.Ed.2d 960 (1965) |
| Decision Date | 15 March 1965 |
| Docket Number | M,No. 476,476 |
| Parties | Wayne Gilbert MARVEL v. UNITED STATES. isc |
Wayne Gilbert Marvel, pro se.
Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Miller, Beatrice Rosenberg and Theodore George Gilinsky, for the United States.
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama for a hearing as to whether petition was...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
37 cases
-
Mordecai v. United States
...v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274 (1969). 34 315 F.2d 204 (4th Cir. 1963); see also Marvel v. United States, 380 U.S. 262, 85 S.Ct. 953, 13 L.Ed.2d 960 (1965), vacating 335 F.2d 101 (5th Cir. 1964); Harper v. United States, 368 F.2d 53 (10th Cir. 35 See Andrews v. Unit......
-
Rodriguez v. Seamans
... ... Dr. Robert C. SEAMANS, Jr., Secretary of the Air Force, et al ... No. 24599 ... United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit ... Argued November 1, 1971 ... Decided ... ...
-
Ralston v. Robinson, 80-2049
...was not fully apprised of the consequences of being sentenced under the Youth Corrections Act, see, e. g., Marvel v. United States, 380 U.S. 262, 85 S.Ct. 953, 13 L.Ed.2d 960; Caldwell v. United States, 435 F.2d 1079 (CA10 1970); James v. United States, 388 F.2d 453 (CA5 1968); Freeman v. U......
- Cipres v. United States
Get Started for Free
2 books & journal articles
-
Appendix 13-c Examples of Habeas Claims Based on the Constitution
...translation in cases in which the defendant does not speak English), aff'd 48 F.3d 1214 (2d Cir. 1994). 436. See Marvel v. United States, 380 U.S. 262, 85 S. Ct. 953, 13 L. Ed. 2d 960 (1965) (ordering a rehearing to determine whether the trial judge misled the defendant about maximum possib......
-
Guilty Pleas
...of the critical elements of the offense, see Henderson v. Morgan, 426 U.S. 637, 647 n.18 (1976), and the possible penalty, Marvel v. United States, 380 U.S. 262 (1965); Chapin v . United States, 341 F.2d 900 (10th Cir. 1965); In the Matter of Melvin A ., 216 A.D.2d 227, 227–28, 628 N.Y.S.2d......
