Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

352 U.S. 565

77 S. Ct. 550

1 L. Ed. 2d 593

Docket No. Misc. 531.

Johnson v. United States

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided March 4, 1957.

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1957-03-04

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““ * * * Of course, certification by the judge presiding at the trial carries great weight but, necessarily, it cannot be conclusive. Upon a proper showing a Court of Appeals has a duty to displace a District Court’s certification. Moreover, a Court of Appeals must, under Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 , 58 S.Ct. 1019 , 82 L.Ed. 1461 , afford one who challenges that certification the aid of counsel unless he insists on being his own. Finally, either the defendant or his assigned counsel, must be enabled to show that the grounds for seeking an appeal from the judgment of conviction are not frivolous and do not justify the finding that the appeal is not sought in good faith. This does not require that in every such case the United States must furnish the defendant with a stenographic transcript of the trial. It is essential however, that he be assured some appropriate means— such as the district judge’s notes or an agreed statement by trial counsel — of making manifest the basis of his claim that the District Court committed error in certifying that the desired appeal was not pursued in good faith. See Miller v. United States, 317 U.S. 192 , 198, 63 S.Ct. 187 , 190, 87 L.Ed. 179 . “Since here the Court of Appeals did not assign counsel to assist petitioner in prosecuting his application for leave to appeal in forma pauperis and since it does not appear that the Court of Appeals assured petitioner adequate means of presenting it with a fair basis for determining whether the Dist”

quoted by 6 later decisions, including Weber v. United States, Whitt v. United States

““(a) Any court of the United States may authorize the commencement, prosecution or defense of any suit, action or proceeding, civil or criminal, or appeal therein, without prepayment of fees and costs or security therefor, by a citizen who makes affidavit that he is unable to pay such costs or give security therefor. Such affidavit shall state the nature of the action, defense or appeal and affiant’s belief that he is entitled to redress. “An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if- the trial court certifies in writing that it is - not taken in good faith.” -”

quoted by 4 later decisions, including Weber v. United States, Warren v. United States

Relies on Johnson v. Zerbst · Miller v. United States

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Vacated and remanded · 8–0 · Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1957-03-04

How this case has been cited

Cited by 558 later decisions (39 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2025 · most notably Anders v. California (1967), Douglas v. People of State of California (1963)

418 federal appellate · 6 district · 29 state decisions — followed in 10 states

267019571960197019801990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1

The petition for writ of certiorari is granted, as is leave to proceed in forma pauperis. By the Act of June 25, 1910, 36 Stat. 866, as now enlarged in 28 U.S.C. § 1915, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915, Congress provided for proceedingsin forma pauperis on appeal unless 'the trial court certifies in writing that it (the appeal) is not taken in good faith.' Such certification is not final in the sense that the convicted defendant is barred from showing that it was unwarranted and that an appeal should be allowed. Of course, certification by the judge presiding at the trial carries great weight but, necessarily, if cannot be conclusive. Upon a proper showing a Court of Appeals has a duty to displace a District Court's certification. Moreover, a Court of Appeals must, under Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 58 S.Ct. 1019, 82 L.Ed. 1461, afford one who challenges that certification the aid of counsel unless he insists on being his own. Finally, either the defendant or his assigned counsel must be enabled to show that the grounds for seeking an appeal from the judgment of conviction are not frivolous and do not justify the finding that the appeal is not sought in good faith. This does not require that in every such case the United States must furnish the defendant with a stenographic transcript of the trial. It is essential, however, that he be assured some appropriate means—such as the district judge's notes or an agreed statement by trial counsel—of making manifest the basis of his claim that the District Court committed error in certifying that the desired appeal was not pursued in good faith. See Miller v. United States, 317 U.S. 192, 198, 63 S.Ct. 187, 190, 87 L.Ed. 179.

¶2

Since here the Court of Appeals did not assign counsel to assist petitioner in prosecuting his application for leave to appeal in forma pauperis and since it does not appear that the Court of Appeals assured petitioner adequate means of presenting it with a fair basis for determining whether the District Court's certification was warranted, the judgment below must be vacated and the case remanded to the Court of Appeals for proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

¶3

Judgment vacated and case remanded.

¶4

So ordered.

/352/us/565 · .json · Public domain