Document: 389 U.S. 40 88 S.Ct. 194 19 L.Ed.2d 41 Louis ROBERTSv.LaVALLEE, Warden. No. 193, Misc. Oct. 23, 1967. Warren H. Greene, Jr., for petitioner. Leon B. Polsky, Legal Aid Society of New York, amicus curiae. PER CURIAM. 1 Petitioner is an indigent. He was charged with robbery, larceny, and assault in York. When his case called trial, petitioner asked that the court furnish him, at state expense, minutes a prior preliminary hearing, which major witnesses had testified. A York statute provided transcript hearing would be furnished 'on payment * fees rate five cents every hundred words.' N.Y.Code Crim.Proc. § 206. The trial denied request free transcript. 2 convicted crimes sentenced to term 15—20 years prison. His conviction affirmed by Appellate Division Supreme Court. Court Appeals leave appeal. We petition certiorari. issue under Federal Constitution denial raised each stage these proceedings. 3 next applied habeas corpus Northern District denied, believing no federal constitutional right hearing. Thereafter, decided People v. Montgomery, 18 N.Y.2d 993, 278 N.Y.S.2d 226, 224 N.E.2d 730 (1966). That holds statutory requirement transcript, as indigent, equal protection unconstitutional, both State Constitutions. 4 On petitioner's appeal from Court, Second Circuit determined should apply courts relief doctrine Montgomery. acknowledged already exhausted remedies. But it thought 'constitutional necessity intervention' 'open doubt' 'the question ought favor permitting determination first instance.' Accordingly, dismissed without prejudice renewal questions presented after further proceedings 5 sought grant writ, we vacate judgment below. 6 Our decisions more than decade now have made clear differences access instruments needed vindicate legal rights, when based upon financial situation defendant, are repugnant Constitution. See, e.g., Draper Washington, 372 487, 83 774, 9 899 (1963); Griffin Illinois, 351 12, 76 585, 100 L.Ed. 891 (1956). Only last Term, Long Iowa, 385 192, 87 362, 17 290 (1966), reiterated statement Smith Bennett, 365 708, 709, 81 895, 896, 39 (1961), 'to interpose any consideration between indigent prisoner exercise sue liberty deny laws.' doubt struck down could not meet test our decisions. 7 Nor do believe there can adequately known desire obtain agree Judge Medina, dissenting Appeals, demand 'clear unequivocal.' 8 In Brown Allen, 344 443, 73 397, 97 469 (1953), considered requirement, 28 U.S.C. 2254, exhaust remedies before applying relief. concluded Congress intended require repetitious applications courts.' U.S., 449, n. 3, 403. declined rule mere possibility successful application sufficient bar Such severely limit scope statute. observations here. has thoroughly remedies, recognized. Still litigation unnecessarily time-consuming otherwise burdensome. This substantial interest ruling once again on case. conceive reason why wish burden its judicial calendar narrow resolution predetermined established principles. 10 motion proceed forma pauperis writ certiorari granted, vacated remanded consistent this opinion. 11 Mr. Justice HARLAN, dissenting. 12 As states, told if he wished pay it. fails add, however, counsel were present they grand jury testimony witness but use time suggested been put, although position know what contains. 13 cited majority opinion fall far short declaring document related criminal process, matter how demonstrably trivial significance, must supplied indigents simply because willing make available others able Rather formulate such undiscriminating rule, predictably may lead narrowing availability documents constitutionally required I least undertake examine importance particular question. 14 examination necessary case, for, Court's recognizes, exists adequate basis law affording seeks Believing, did interfere administration justice courts, particularly involves reaching unnecessarily, see Harrison NAACP, 360 167, 79 1025, 1152, affirm decision 15 addition, circumstances depicted record, consider disposition improvident even postulates understand issuance corpus, hence setting aside conviction, investigation whether error found committed actually prejudiced defendant. Since appears likelihood reveal 'harmless beyond reasonable doubt,' Chapman California, 386 18, 24, 824, 705, sent back instruction remand determine prejudice. Cf. Roberts United States, 1, 18. Due respect processes requires much.

Category: 1