State v. King
Opinions
ORDER
This cause having been submitted to the court, and it appearing to the court that the defendant’s motion for appointment of counsel for the purpose of this appeal was not granted by the district court; that the defendant appeared as his own counsel; that both the defendant and counsel for the State have raised the issue of representation by counsel in oral arguments; and that the case of Douglas v. California, 372 U. S. 353, 83 S. Ct. 814, 9 L. Ed. 2d 811, is applicable.
NOW, THEREFORE, on the court’s own motion, it is ordered:
1. The submission herein is hereby vacated.
2. The district court is directed forthwith to appoint counsel for the appellant herein under the provisions of L. B. 839, 1965 Legislative Session, Laws 1965, chapter 151, page 493.
3. Time for filing appellant’s brief is extended to January 31, 1966.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
138 N.W.2d 805 (State v. King) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.