October Term 2004 · Docket 03-10198

Can a state deny appointed counsel for a first direct appeal?

The dispute centers on whether Michigan can refuse to provide free lawyers for indigent defendants seeking their first direct appeal.

Official caption
Halbert v. Michigan
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Moran argued the right to counsel covers first direct felony appeals.

    Mr. Schaerr argued the Court should respect state legislative design.

    Mr. Restuccia focused on the specific waiver language used by the defendant.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests the scope of the right to counsel in state criminal appeals.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 25, 2005.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the side that brought the case wants the Court to strike down the Michigan statute.

State wants the Court to uphold the Michigan statute.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the side that brought the case argues the right to counsel extends to first direct appeals.

State argues the Court should defer to state legislative choices.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Scalia asked if the defendant knew his rights did not include this appeal.

Justice Kennedy asked if the case turned on the adequacy of advice given.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

Indigent defendants face a choice between self-representation and no appeal in first-tier cases.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON