Petitioner before trial filed an affidavit requesting the
District Court to assign counsel pursuant to the Criminal Justice
Act, but the court, without adequate inquiry into petitioner's
financial ability to retain counsel, disapproved the request. The
Court of Appeals, after granting leave to appeal
in forma
pauperis, affirmed.
Held: The trial court should have explored the
possibility that petitioner could afford only partial payment for
the services of trial counsel and that counsel be appointed on that
basis as permitted by the Act.
Certiorari granted; 373 F.2d 894, vacated and remanded.
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner was found guilty by the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia of refusing to report for
civilian employment, in violation of § 12 of the Universal Military
Training and Service Act, 62 Stat. 622, 50 U.S.C.App. § 462. Before
trial, he filed an affidavit with the court requesting assigned
counsel pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A.
The court considered the affidavit, questioned petitioner and
disapproved the request. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
granted leave to appeal
in forma pauperis, assigned
counsel to assist petitioner in his appeal and affirmed the
conviction. Petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari.
Before this Court the Solicitor General has conceded that the
record does not convincingly show that there
Page 389 U. S. 21
was adequate inquiry into the question of petitioner's financial
ability to retain counsel, in that "the trial court should have
explored the possibility that petitioner could afford only partial
payment for the services of trial counsel and that counsel be
appointed on that basis, as the Criminal Justice Act permits
(
see 18 U.S.C. § 3006(A)(c) and (f))." The Solicitor
General urges, however, that there is no basis for believing that
petitioner suffered prejudice from the District Court's error, an
argument we find unpersuasive.
The motion for leave to proceed
in forma pauperis and
the petition for writ of certiorari are granted, the judgment is
vacated, and the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for the
Fifth Circuit for reconsideration in light of the Solicitor
General's Memorandum and the relevant criteria of the Criminal
Justice Act.
MR. JUSTICE BLACK dissents.
MR. JUSTICE MARSHALL took no part in the consideration or
decision of this case.