Document: 363 U.S. 697 80 S.Ct. 1314 4 L.Ed.2d 1500 Larry Dayton HUDSON, Petitioner,v.STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. 466. Argued May 16, 1960. Decided June 20, Mr. William Joslin, Raleigh, N.C., for petitioner. Ralph Moody, respondent. Justice STEWART delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The petitioner and two others were brought to trial before a jury in Superior Court Cumberland County, North Carolina, upon an indictment jointly charging them with robbery. When their case was called one defendants, David Cain, represented by lawyer his own selection. other defendant did not have counsel. Before pleading indictment, petitioner, who eighteen years old, asked presiding judge appoint help him defense, stating that he without funds employ counsel incapable defending himself.1 prosecutor conceded unable attorney.2 denied motion, telling 'The will try see your rights are protected throughout case.' 2 All three defendants thereupon pleaded guilty, proceeded immediately trial. first witness State alleged victim Midway through this witness's testimony Cain's offered represent all codefendants 'as long as interests don't conflict.' At conclusion direct advised should cross-examine only on behalf because 'I think you probably conflicting interest there.' Thereafter cross-examined intensely lawyer, out criminal record previous commitment state mental institution. codefendant also briefly witness. witnesses prosecution deputy sheriffs, testified statements made defendants. They but 3 State's evidence, moved be dismissed. motion stated Cain had no evidence offer. Thereupon, presence jury, tendered plea guilty petit larceny. This agreed accepted court. then withdrew from proceedings. proceeded. remaining each took stand. Each statement denying at some length, emphasis record. Neither nor produced any or further evidence. given opportunity argue do so. 5 found both larceny person, felony under Carolina law, following day pronounced sentence. committed penitentiary term five years. convicted sentenced jail months six months' suspended 6 petitioner's subsequent appeal Supreme dismissed want prosecution. filed court 'petition writ certiorari,' which urged failure provide deprived constitutional rights. petition treated application relief Post-Conviction Hearing Act.3 In proceedings appointed petitioner,4 held hearing present. After considering presented, including transcript proceedings,5 concluded special circumstances shown required appointment counsel, been after fair impartial trial, there consequently denial due process law. accordingly dismissed.6 declined review order dismissal. We granted certiorari consider substantial claim asserted. 361 812, 91, 60. 7 presided post-conviction detailed findings fact. He 'advised right challenge when selected cross examine jury.' 'during properly excluded inadmissible, examined against request behalf.' 8 does take issue these findings. Counsel's primary rather is comparative youth, relying Wade v. Mayo, 334 672, 68 1270, 92 L.Ed. 1647. it lawyer's resulted deprivation where Federal District habeas corpus eighteen-year-old 'an inexperienced youth unfamiliar procedure, capable adequately representing himself.' U.S., page 683, 1276. Here, contrast, 'although age sixth grade school time intelligent, well informed, familiar experienced procedure trials * *.' Evaluations nature peculiarly within province trier facts based personal observation. As pointed '(t)here individuals who, reason age, ignorance capacity, themselves relatively simple nature. incapacity purely can determined examination observation individual.' 684, 9 view court, supported proceedings, this, short, said constitutionally unfair either deliberate overreaching simply defendant's chronological are. Moreover, shows up receiving effective benefit activity, verdict, possible could continued those client retained him. 10 But happen. Instead, advice entered guilt midway potential prejudice such occurrence obvious has recognized courts Carolina. Hunter, 94 N.C. 829, 835; Bryant, 236 745, 747, 73 S.E.2d 791, 792; Kerley, 246 157, 97 876. Yet precisely moment great left entirely devices, case. very point go alone. 11 precise course followed cure may result codefendant's appear clear decisions. Hunter while infrequently another allowed enter exercise care 'to cto practice works undue party trial.' 835. Later cases somewhat more explicit. Bryant curative instructions sufficient avoid error prejudicial defendant. pages 747—748, 792. More recently, Kerley case, '(w)hen therefor made, duty instruct considered bearing latter's must solely basis reference plea.' 161, S.E.2d, 879. Indeed expressed even 'a positive instruction would removed subtle unavoidably (a codefendant's) 162, 880. 12 present make instructed disregard plea, gave none, finally instructing jury. A layman hardly aware fact entitled protection effect guilt. Even less expected know proper follow invoke protection. uncertainty law respect serves underline need advise 13 finding specifically evaluating judge's give cautionary event, we cannot escape responsibility making our Spano New York, 360 315, 316, 79 1202, 1203, 1265. hold thus arose during counsel's assistance operated deprive guaranteed Fourteenth Amendment. position himself raised problems requiring professional knowledge experience beyond layman's ken. Gibbs Burke, 337 773, 69 1247, 93 1686; Cash Culver, 358 633, 432, 557. 14 Reversed. 15 CLARK, whom WHITTAKER joins, dissenting. 16 bids 'furnish opportunities hitherto uncontemplated opening wide prison doors land.' Foster Illinois, 1947, 332 134, 139, 67 1716, 1719 91 1955. Without so much mentioning Betts Brady, 1942, 316 455, 62 1252, 86 1595, cuts serious inroads into holding releases now fourth offender though 18 3-to-5-year sentence person. ground single circumstance occurring i.e., codefendant, permitted close plead 'larceny, amount misdemeanor.' says 'made Amendment.' Strangely enough, digs sua sponte, neither State, thought 'unfairness' discuss it, its existence mentioned recital brief. truth affirmatively received indicate lack 17 Court, however, speculates change 'raised ken.' himself' resulted. speculative and, I submit, follow. fact, jury—despite language court's charge indicated 'violence,' intimidation putting (the victim) fear'—refused find common-law offense robbery lesser offense, here clearly support verdict charge. appraise jury's realistic say influenced greater offense. all, driver car participated enterprise. identify unlike 'wholeheartedly admitted' officers. apparently plea. Petitioner hand chief actor addition, record, served prison, twice escapee therefrom, gives every appearance being hardened criminal. Still It reasonable assume cites cases* 'potential prejudice' finds suffered None cited parties. said, briefs. new theory reversal. they indicate, frankly points out, exercised 'undue prejudice.' regard fully presentation full, fair, intelligent objection intimated short answer point. underlines submit since Post Conviction Act ago, once handling necessitating 19 While wish labor issue, careful study convinces me complexity technicality. induced victim, elderly man, ruse home dollar. nighttime way drove woods. ordered car, directed hands, went pockets, taking billford, containing $24. sole question namely, old man's money? position. stand version affair, admitting scene There never withheld used perjured incompetent admitted petitioner; compulsory witnesses; ignorant feeble-minded; full sufficient. itself finds, 'is case' 'over-reaching prosecutor' 'unfair primarily depends, 1948, 1647, nowise controlling. therefore follows lone 'youthfulness formal education, timely inability hire fumbling defense,' show refusal 20 shows, found, trials, having previously tried different occasions careless reckless driving, breaking entering, driving influence intoxicating liquor, assault robbery.' Only same defended what emphasize ingenuity than defense here? direct. Both story: entering drinking beer money buy pint vodka. partook vodka became ill nauseated sitting back car. got seat, stopped helped latter fell down ground. group away. leaving billford 'almost behind (back) seat.' proposed victim. returned gone, although 'got hollered him,' found. scene, billfold thrown indeed shrewd defense. trouble believe it. 21 On saying process, supra, affirm judgment. attorney am myself. If please, like ask attorney.' able attorney, whether say.' N.C.Gen.Stat. § 15—217 et seq. provides: 'If alleges pay costs proceeding, bond sureties payment proceeding furnish security means mortgage lien property secure costs, proceed prosecute providing costs. procure shall wishes requested, if satisfied fix compensation paid which, determined, county conviction occurred.' N.C.Gen.Stat., 15—219. conducted dismissal merits claim. nowhere suggested chosen inappropriate remedy claims unconstitutional Hackney, 240 230, 81 778; Cruse, 238 53, 76 320.

Category: 0