Case Name: PEOPLE v. ROCHA
Court: Michigan Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1968-10-21
Citations: 13 Mich. App. 596
Docket Number: Docket No. 4,549
Parties: PEOPLE v. ROCHA.
Judges: Quinn, P. J., and Holbrook and Vander Wal, JJ., concurred.
Reporter: Michigan appeals reports; cases decided in the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Volume: 13
Pages: 596–597

Head Matter:
PEOPLE v. ROCHA.
1. Criminal Law — Appointment of Counsel — Indigency.
• Trial judge’s denial of assigned counsel to criminal defendant is proper only if reeord discloses that defendant was financially able to provide counsel and the importance of circumstances in each case makes it impracticable for Court of Appeals to establish guide lines for such a decision (GCR 1963, 785.3[1]).
2. Same — Appointment op Counsel — Indigency.
Refusal of trial judge, when asked, to appoint counsel for defendant charged with felonious assault held, improper where record failed to demonstrate defendant’s financial ability to retain counsel (CL 1948, § 750.82).
References for Points in Headnotes
[1, 2] 21 Am Jur 2d, Criminal Law § 318 et scq.
Appeal from Lenawee, Martin (Rex B.), J.
Submitted Division 2 October 8, 1968, at Lansing
(Docket No. 4,549.)
Decided October 21, 1968.
Librado Rocha was convicted of felonious assault. Defendant appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
F‘¥ank'"j. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengosld, Solicitor General, and Harvey A. Koselka, Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.
Hammond, Baker $ Kralick, for defendant on appeal.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Defendant was tried by a jury on a charge of assault with a dangerous weapon, CL 1948, §750.82 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 28.277), and lie was convicted. Defendant represented himself at trial because the trial judge denied a request for appointed counsel. On appeal, defendant questions the propriety of this denial. It is only proper if the record discloses that defendant was financially able to provide counsel. GrCR 1963, 785.3(1).
"We are unable to' say on this ré'córd that defendant was financially able to hire his own attorney. In spite of the commendable efforts'of the trial judge and the prosecuting attorney to assuré defendant a fair trial, the record before us demonstrates this did not occur. ' :
The problem presented by this appeal has been, is and will be one of the most recurrent and troublesome that the trial bench must face. Any attempt by this Court to furnish guide lines in this area would create more problems than it would solve. Each case is a separate problem, and adequate review is only possible on an adequate record. Trial of a criminal defendant without counsel always entails risk.
Reversed and remanded for new trial.
Quinn, P. J., and Holbrook and Vander Wal, JJ., concurred.