On the same day that an information was filed in a state court
charging him with murder, a 17-year-old defendant was arraigned,
convicted on his plea of guilty, and sentenced to life
imprisonment. He had no counsel, and none was offered or assigned;
the court did not apprise him of the consequences of his plea of
guilty; no evidence was offered in his behalf, and none of the
State's witnesses was cross-examined.
Held: that he was deprived of rights essential to a
fair hearing under the Federal Constitution. P.
329 U. S.
665.
313 Mich. 548, 21 N.W.2d 849, reversed.
A state court in which he had been convicted and sentenced for
murder denied petitioner's motion for leave to file a delayed
motion for a new trial. The state supreme
Page 329 U. S. 664
court affirmed. 313 Mich. 548, 21 N.W.2d 849. This Court granted
certiorari. 329 U.S. 702.
Reversed, p.
329 U. S.
665.
PER CURIAM.
In conformity with Michigan procedure, petitioner moved for
leave to file a delayed motion for new trial in the court in which
he had been convicted of first degree murder. Serious impairment of
his constitutional rights at the arraignment and trial were
asserted as grounds for the motion. The trial court denied the
motion, and the Supreme Court of Michigan, on appeal, affirmed that
ruling. 313 Mich. 548, 21 N.E.2d 849. We granted certiorari because
of the importance of the constitutional issues presented. 329 U.S.
702.
The facts are not in dispute. On May 16, 1932, an information
was filed in the Circuit Court of Lenawee County, Michigan,
charging petitioner, then seventeen years of age, and one Virgil
Scott with the crime of murder. On the same day, petitioner was
arraigned, tried, convicted of first degree murder, and sentenced
to life imprisonment. The record indicates that petitioner was
without legal assistance throughout all these proceedings, and was
never advised of his right to counsel. The court did not explain
the consequences of the plea of guilty, and the record indicates
considerable confusion in petitioner's mind at the time of the
arraignment as to the effect of such a plea. No
Page 329 U. S. 665
evidence in petitioner's behalf was introduced at the trial, and
none of the State's witnesses was subjected to
cross-examination.
After reviewing the foregoing facts, the Supreme Court of
Michigan determined that the record revealed no deprivation of
petitioner's constitutional rights. The court indicated that it had
given consideration to the case of
Hawk v. Olson,
326 U. S. 271, and
the authorities cited therein, but concluded that the rule of the
Michigan cases was determinative.
See People v. Williams,
1923, 225 Mich. 133, 195 N.W. 818. In this, there was error.
Here, a seventeen year old defendant confronted by a serious and
complicated criminal charge, was hurried through unfamiliar legal
proceedings without a word being said in his defense. At no time
was assistance of counsel offered or mentioned to him, nor was he
apprised of the consequences of his plea. Under the holdings of
this Court, petitioner was deprived of rights essential to a fair
hearing under the Federal Constitution.
Powell v. Alabama,
287 U. S. 45;
Williams v. Kaiser, 323 U. S. 471;
Tompkins v. Missouri, 323 U. S. 485;
White v. Ragen, 324 U. S. 760;
Hawk v. Olson, supra. See Betts v. Brady,
316 U. S. 455.
Reversed.
