Document: 334 U.S. 728 68 S.Ct. 1256 92 L.Ed. 1683 GRYGERv.BURKE. No. 541. Argued April 26, 27, 1948. Decided June 14, Rehearing Denied Oct. 11, Mr. Archibald Cox, of Cambridge, Mass., for petitioner. Franklin E. Barr, Philadelphia, Pa., respondent. Justice JACKSON delivered the opinion Court. 1 The Commonwealth Pennsylvania holds petitioner prisoner under a life sentence as an habitual criminal. His claim here, protesting denial by State Supreme Court his petition writ habeas corpus, is that Federal Constitution requires to release him on due process law grounds because (1) he was sene nced offender without counsel or offer counsel; (2) one convictions which based occurred before enactment Habitual Criminal Act1 and statute therefore unconstitutionally retroactive ex post facto; (3) sentencing this Act subjects double jeopardy. 2 At outset, we face suggestion case cannot properly be decided merits because, matter state law, attack may premature since would validly restrained prior sentences not expiring until at least February 1949, even if were invalidated. Some members prefer affirm judgment ground. However, question free from difficulty, issue fully litigated in Court, since, merits,2 same conclusion reached, dispose manner. 3 Beginning 1927, age seventeen, has been arrested eight times crimes violence, followed each instance plea guilty conviction. Respondent states, does deny, last 20 years life, over 13 have spent jail. A schedule pleas pertinent data appended, those italics being four basis information filed charging fourth offender. Brought into court limited charge, acknowledged identity convict previous cases given pursuant Act. He it said neither advised right obtain nor offered him.3 4 It rather overstrains our credulity believe who had defendant whom twice waged defenses, albeit unsuccessful ones, did know engage counsel. No request do so appears. only fact charge whether person convicted cases. This then admitted now deny. other sentence, appear any helpful unknown court. 5 judge prejudiced mistake construing regarded mandatory discretionary. clear construed statute, are empowered pronounce error law. trial court, view defendant's long criminal record, considered duty impose referred 'required Act.' But there nothing indicate felt constrained penalty except facts warranted it. And event courts say its what discretion had. Nothing record impeaches fairness temperateness with approached task. action affirmed highest Commonwealth. We liberty conjecture acted interpretation different might adopt set up own declaring denied. treat mere occurred, process; otherwise, every erroneous decision come here federal constitutional question. 6 just length obligation States provide defendants plead non-capital offenses. Bute v. Illinois, 333 640, 763. Notwithstanding resourceful argument assigned think precedent settles no exceptional circumstances present that, disclosed us, State's failure render conviction invalid. 7 Nor entered calculations became passed, makes invalidly viewed either new jeopardy additional earlier crimes. stiffened latest crime, aggravated offense repetitive one. Cf. Moore Missouri, 159 673, 16 179, 40 301; McDonald Massachusetts, 180 311, 21 389, 45 542; Graham West Virginia, 224 616, 32 583, 56 917; Carlesi New York, 233 51, 34 576, 58 843; rel. Sullivan Ashe, 302 59, 82 43. 8 affirmed. 9 Table Pleas Convictions. 10 Date Charge Plea Sentence 11 1927 Burglary Guilty year. 12 1928 Assault battery; carrying concealed 14 deadly weapon. 15 1929 Burglary; breaking Not Committed entering intent Reformatory 17 commit felony. indefinitely. 18 1930 Armed robbery, armed years. 19 assualt, rob. 1937 Burglary, receiving stolen 1/2 22 goods, 23 24 1943 25 good's—12 offenses goods. 26 1944 27 Aggravated assault Suspended. 28 battery. 29 RUTLEDGE, BLACK, DOUGLAS MURPHY join, dissenting. 30 Even upon narrow majority adhere concerning scope cases, guaranteed Fourteenth Amendment's requirement I square made Townsend Burke, 736, 62 1252. 31 declares 'the disadvantage absence counsel, when showing resulted actually taken advantage of, prejudiced, make out violation process.' In finds court's misinformation sum itted misreading carelessness respect. On Gryger's invalid, although such inducing prejudice Townsend's case. my judgment, reveal circumstance, working induce exactly point Townsend, namely, critical sentence. So far reveals, Gryger sentenced imprisonment misconception term mandatory, discretionary, Act.1 33 Exactly opposite true. explicit terms puts imposition offenders 'in judge.'2 Moreover, appeal authorized 'not alleged legal errors but also justice thereof,' costs reasonable fee paid Commonwealth.3 spite exercise it, judge, remarking suffered convictions, repeatedly spoke mandatory. statements quoted margin typical.4 35 immaterial probably imposed discretion. Petitioner entitled pronounced manner, automatic mandate statute. very essence judicial process, where required, itself merely concern speculate exercised. 36 misconception, together deprived chance heard crucial left hearing vital after received. could assumed, says, knew frequent appearances court,5 still indeed substantially disproves, exact Act.6 therefore, misled seem language giving hint discretionary power, mitigation representative correct considerations induced less severe than pronounced. To paraphrase concluding opn ion case, 'Counsel changed steps see predicated controlling fair play withheld prisoner.' 37 find difficult comprehend proper function prejudicial deprives imposing exercising effect. Perhaps difference serves illustrate how capricious results depend Constitution, vagaries judges, different, will regard incident course particular proceedings prejudicial. § 1108 Penal Code 1939, P.S. 5108. contested below merits. assume passed petitioner's allegations deprivation rights issues open here. Herndon Lowry, 301 242, 247, 57 732, 734, 81 1066. frequently held provision according require appointment noncapital See, example, McGlinn Smith, 344 Pa. 41, A.2d 1; Withers 350 493, 39 610. See Betts Brady, 316 455, 465, 1252, 1257, 86 1595. statutes destitute dependents accused murder shall March 22, 1907, 784. Pa.Stat.Ann. tit. 18, Section 5108(b) provides shown offense, 'shall, * sentenced, trying penitentiary natural life.' 5108(d), authorizes procedure instant viz., separate proceeding within two conviction, prescribed clause (b) section *.' That vests clearly recognized Commonwealth's Foster 336 238, 240, 542. 5108(d). '* becomes duty, Assembly, say, found time felony period, required 'In words, viewpoint: (a offender) must removed possibility ever committing again.' dubious assumption, seem, generally confines trials capital e.g., 610, cf. note text. Petitioner, served offender, confined financial means preparing defense. alleged, contradiction, prison authorities refused copy answer, course, need assistance trips through courts. Whatever knowledge procedures acquired, unfamiliar act. secured access materials needed prepare defense, adequately informed statute's thereunder, highly unrealistic capable presenting hearing. pleadings telling witness intelligence education. obvious unable involved assistant district attorney representing remarked, 'He doesn't understand.'

Category: 0