About: Turner v. Rogers

An Entity of Type: unit of work, from Named Graph: http://dbpedia.org, within Data Space: dbpedia.org

Turner v. Rogers, 564 U.S. 431 (2011), is a case that was decided by the United States Supreme Court on June 20, 2011, relating to the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. The Court held that Turner was not entitled to a public defender in cases regarding family nonsupport. However, in cases in which a state is not required to provide counsel, it must provide some other safeguard to reduce the risk of erroneous deprivation of liberty in civil contempt cases. The particular case the Court took under review was a child support payment case and the point of contention was the process of the defendant's income determination by the court.

Property	Value
dbo:abstract	Turner v. Rogers, 564 U.S. 431 (2011), is a case that was decided by the United States Supreme Court on June 20, 2011, relating to the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. The Court held that Turner was not entitled to a public defender in cases regarding family nonsupport. However, in cases in which a state is not required to provide counsel, it must provide some other safeguard to reduce the risk of erroneous deprivation of liberty in civil contempt cases. The particular case the Court took under review was a child support payment case and the point of contention was the process of the defendant's income determination by the court. (en)
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink	https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/10-10.pdf http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/turner-v-price/ https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/564/431/ https://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2010/2010_10_10 https://www.oyez.org/cases/2010/10-10
dbo:wikiPageID	30672744 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageLength	13936 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID	1099710722 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink	dbc:2011_in_United_States_case_law dbr:DeFunis_v._Odegaard dbr:United_States_Supreme_Court dbr:Due_Process_Clause dbr:Criminal_contempt dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Roberts_Court dbr:SCOTUSblog dbr:Clarence_Thomas dbr:Mootness dbc:United_States_civil_due_process_case_law dbr:Stephen_Breyer dbc:United_States_Sixth_Amendment_appointment_of_counsel_case_law dbr:Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Public_defender dbr:Counsel dbr:L._Ed._2d dbr:South_Carolina_Supreme_Court dbr:Certiorari dbr:Sixth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Office_of_Child_Support_Enforcement dbr:S.E.2d dbr:Civil_contempt
dbp:arguedate	0001-03-23 (xsd:gMonthDay)
dbp:argueyear	2011 (xsd:integer)
dbp:case	Turner v. Rogers, (en)
dbp:decidedate	0001-06-20 (xsd:gMonthDay)
dbp:decideyear	2011 (xsd:integer)
dbp:dissent	Thomas (en)
dbp:docket	10 (xsd:integer)
dbp:fullname	Michael D. Turner v. Rebecca L. Rogers (en)
dbp:holding	The Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, while it does not require a state to provide counsel at civil contempt proceedings to indigent individuals, even if incarceration is a possibility, does require some safeguards to prevent the erroneous deprivation of liberty. South Carolina Supreme Court reversed and remanded. (en)
dbp:joindissent	Scalia; Roberts, Alito (en)
dbp:joinmajority	Kennedy, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan (en)
dbp:justia	https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/564/431/
dbp:lawsapplied	dbr:Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Sixth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
dbp:litigants	Turner v. Rogers (en)
dbp:majority	Breyer (en)
dbp:opinion	https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/10-10.pdf
dbp:oralargument	https://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2010/2010_10_10
dbp:otherSource	Supreme Court (en)
dbp:otherUrl	https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/10-10.pdf
dbp:oyez	https://www.oyez.org/cases/2010/10-10
dbp:parallelcitations	172800.0
dbp:prior	17280.0
dbp:uspage	431 (xsd:integer)
dbp:usvol	564 (xsd:integer)
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate	dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:Citation_needed dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case dbt:Reflist dbt:Ussc
dcterms:subject	dbc:2011_in_United_States_case_law dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Roberts_Court dbc:United_States_civil_due_process_case_law dbc:United_States_Sixth_Amendment_appointment_of_counsel_case_law
rdf:type	owl:Thing dbo:Case dbo:LegalCase dbo:UnitOfWork wikidata:Q2334719 yago:WikicatUnitedStatesSupremeCourtCases yago:WikicatUnitedStatesSupremeCourtCasesOfTheRobertsCourt yago:Abstraction100002137 yago:Case107308889 yago:Event100029378 yago:Happening107283608 yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase
rdfs:comment	Turner v. Rogers, 564 U.S. 431 (2011), is a case that was decided by the United States Supreme Court on June 20, 2011, relating to the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. The Court held that Turner was not entitled to a public defender in cases regarding family nonsupport. However, in cases in which a state is not required to provide counsel, it must provide some other safeguard to reduce the risk of erroneous deprivation of liberty in civil contempt cases. The particular case the Court took under review was a child support payment case and the point of contention was the process of the defendant's income determination by the court. (en)
rdfs:label	Turner v. Rogers (en)
owl:sameAs	freebase:Turner v. Rogers yago-res:Turner v. Rogers wikidata:Turner v. Rogers https://global.dbpedia.org/id/4wrkk
prov:wasDerivedFrom	wikipedia-en:Turner_v._Rogers?oldid=1099710722&ns=0
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf	wikipedia-en:Turner_v._Rogers
foaf:name	(en) Michael D. Turner v. Rebecca L. Rogers (en)
is dbo:wikiPageRedirects of	dbr:564_U.S._431 dbr:Turner_v_Rogers
is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink of	dbr:Child_support_in_the_United_States dbr:Stephanos_Bibas dbr:564_U.S._431 dbr:Pasqua_v._Council dbr:Hamdi_v._Rumsfeld dbr:Turner_v_Rogers
is foaf:primaryTopic of	wikipedia-en:Turner_v._Rogers