Document: 440 U.S. 367 99 S.Ct. 1158 59 L.Ed.2d 383 Aubrey SCOTT, Petitioner,v.State of ILLINOIS. No. 77-1177. Argued Dec. 4, 1978. Decided March 5, 1979. Syllabus Petitioner, an indigent, was convicted shoplifting and fined $50 after a bench trial in Illinois state court. The applicable statute set the maximum penalty for such offense at $500 fine, one year jail, or both. Petitioner's conviction ultimately affirmed by Supreme Court, over petitioner's contention that line cases culminating Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 25, 92 2006, 32 530, requires provision counsel whenever imprisonment is authorized penalty. Held: Sixth Fourteenth Amendments require no indigent criminal defendant be sentenced to term unless State has afforded him right assistance appointed his defense, but do not court appoint defendant, as petitioner, who charged with statutory which upon imposed. Pp. 369-374. (a) supra, limits constitutional proceedings case actually leads imprisonment. P. 373. (b) Even were matter res nova, Argersinger's central premise—that actual different kind from fines mere threat imprisonment—is eminently sound warrants adoption defining appointment counsel. 68 Ill.2d 269, 12 Ill.Dec. 174, 369 N.E.2d 881, affirmed. John S. Elson, Chicago, Ill. petitioner. Gerri Papushkewych, Asst. Atty. Gen., Springfield, Ill., respondent. Mr. Justice REHNQUIST delivered opinion Court. 1 We granted certiorari this resolve conflict among lower federal courts regarding proper application our decision 530 (1972).1 436 925, 98 2817, 56 767. Petitioner Scott theft Circuit Court Cook County, His intermediate appellate then Illinois, Scott's United States Constitution required provide its expense. 2 merchandise valued less than $150. fine both.2 petitioner argues Court's 3 rejected contention, quoting following language : 4 "We hold, therefore, absent knowing intelligent waiver, person may imprisoned any offense, whether classified petty, misdemeanor, felony, he represented trial." U.S., 37, S.Ct., 2012. 5 "Under rule we announce today, every judge will know when misdemeanor starts imposed, even though local law permits it, accused He have measure seriousness gravity therefore name lawyer represent before starts." Id., 40, 2014. 6 went on it "not inclined extend " where imposed defendant. 272, 177, 882 (1977). agree Federal does affirm judgment. 7 In petition certiorari, referred issue "the question left open (1972)." Pet. Cert. 5. Whether indeed "left open" depends considers point moving holding are go only so far furnishing defendants. above Argersinger, clearly viewed latter holding. Additional support proposition derived concluding paragraph case: 8 "The run misdemeanors affected today's ruling. But those end up deprivation person's liberty, receive benefit 'the guiding hand counsel' necessary one's liberty jeopardy." 9 other hand, refers opinion, responding Powell, states "need consider requirements Amendment regards loss involved . here fact jail." 10 There considerable doubt itself, originally drafted Framers Bill Rights, contemplated guarantee prosecution employ assist defense. W. Beaney, Right Counsel American Courts 27-30 (1955). Powell Alabama, 287 45, 53 55, 77 L.Ed. 158 (1932), held Alabama obligated Scottsboro defendants, phrasing inquiry "whether defendants substance denied counsel, if so, denial infringes due process clause Amendment." 52, 58. It concluded language: 11 Union express law, determination courts, make duty judge, unable him. most applies broadly all prosecutions, others limited more serious crimes, very number, capital cases. A adopted unanimous accord reflects, establish, inherent appointed, least like present, lends convincing conclusion reached fundamental nature right." 73, 65. Betts Brady, 316 455, 62 1252, 86 1595 (1942), entitled had made each individual failure fairness. turn overruled Gideon Wainwright, 372 335, 83 792, 799 (1963). Gideon, described "that refusal felony did necessarily violate Due Process Clause ." 339, 793. 13 Several Terms later Duncan Louisiana, 391 145, 88 1444, 20 491 (1968), jury guaranteed virtue Amendment. held, however: "It doubtless true there category petty crimes offenses subject should requirement applied States. Crimes carrying possible penalties six months they otherwise qualify 159, 1453 (footnote omitted). Baldwin New York, 399 66, 69, 90 1886, 1888, 26 437 (1970), controlling White "no can deemed 'petty' purposes authorized." 14 Florida urged similar dichotomy employed right-to-counsel area: Any punishable jail defendant.3 analogy, however, observing genealogy brigaded system alone." 29, 2008. 15 number separate opinions Duncan, Baldwin, suggests drawing becomes difficult reach extended further, efforts transpose lines area jurisprudence another. incorporation creates special difficulties, contexts often same principle ramifications distinct degree kind. range human conduct regulated laws much broader laws, particularly "petty" part spectrum. As adjudication, are, willing extrapolate already when, although general sought clear, precise their become so. now decided departed literal meaning And cannot fall back common existed prior enactment Amendment, since perversely gave way felons misdemeanors. See 60, 61. 16 arguments social cost lack available lawyers militated against holding, some because thought these factually incorrect. 37 n. 7, larger incarceration severe sanction result been offered regardless implicit rule. repeatedly trials "where deprived liberty," id., 32, 2010, "a brief period," 33, 2010. Chief concurring also observed "any matter." 41, 17 Although intentions unmistakably clear conclude today delimit proceedings.4 believe premise —that proved reasonably workable, whereas extension would create confusion impose unpredictable, substantial, costs 50 quite diverse States.5 hold judgment accordingly 18 Affirmed. 19 POWELL, concurring. For reasons stated my 44, 2015, (1972), I think Constitution. Moreover, based (even overnight) practical effect precluding types consequences. tends impair functioning justice judges, advance hearing evidence anything about except charge, too compelled forgo legislatively option sentence conviction. Preserving providing impossible impracticable congested urban scores heard single sitting, small rural communities available. 21 Despite continuing reservations rule, approved 1972 four Justices reaffirmed today. important guidance hundreds across country confront problem daily. Accordingly, mindful stare decisis, join hope time majority recognize flexible consistent better serve cause justice. 22 BRENNAN, whom MARSHALL STEVENS join, dissenting. 23 provides: "In shall enjoy Assistance defence." (Emphasis supplied.) (1963), through includes provided. recognized extends likely incarcerated. 24 This presents that, incarceration, punished fine. violation Ill.Rev.Stat., ch. 38, § 16-1 (1969), $500, About decided, trial, without notice entitlement retain or, indigent,1 found guilty pay 25 best ignores basic principles decisions, affirms view, plain wording precedents compel uncounseled violated reversed. * intimates ordaining accuseds fail principled basis deciding case. That demonstrably developed relevant sound. simply chooses ignore them. 27 Wainwright representation proceeding "fundamental essential fair trial," 342, 795, Amendment: 28 "[R]eason reflection us adversary justice, haled into court, poor hire lawyer, assured provided seems obvious truth. Governments, both federal, properly spend vast sums money establish machinery try crime. Lawyers prosecute everywhere protect public's interest orderly society. Similarly, few crime, indeed, get prepare present defenses. government hires defend strongest indications widespread belief necessities, luxuries. crime countries, ours. From beginning, national constitutions laid great emphasis procedural substantive safeguards designed assure impartial tribunals stands equal law. noble ideal realized man face accusers him." 344, 796-97. 29 Earlier critical, equalize sides process,2 give protections defendants.3 established categorical requirement, making former case-by-case analysis, cf. unnecessary covered prosecution, crucial decision; reasoning extended, words "all prosecutions."4 30 Hamlin took cautious approach toward implementing logical consequences Gideon's rationale. days conviction—at counsel—of concealed weapon, $1,000. State, relying apply months, refused limitation pointed out contrary enumerated rights "[i]n prosecutions"; inapplicable "petty offenses";5 historical considerations peculiar trial;6 fundamentally related fairness prosecutions meaningful exercise protections.7 31 earlier cases, suggested less, convicted. expressly reserved.8 II view could prevail extending beyond what assumed exist Argersinger. Neither party questioned existence involving "non-petty" jail.9 addressed extend. applying it—that limitations irrelevant counsel—certainly standard restrictive granting trial. Brother commented 45-46, 2017: wherever drawn, must drawn thus "two dimensional" test counsel: attaches "nonpetty" addition Duke, Appointed Counsel: Beyond, Am.Crim.L.Rev. 601 (1975). 33 "theft" certainly one. jail. Unlike many traffic "regulatory" offenses, carries moral stigma associated common-law traditionally indicative depravity.10 indicated oral argument services professional prosecutor considered offense. Tr. Oral Arg. 39; 49, 2018 (Powell, J., result). Likewise, nonindigent well advised "best get."11 plainly mandated logic including itself.12 III 34 rather decide consonant assumption regard nonpetty explicit retreats indefensible position "actual imprisonment" determining boundary (such one) intolerable result. Not unprecedented exclusive test, problems demonstrate superiority "authorized indigents authorized. 35 First, faithfully implements identified Gideon. rules statutes geared potential particular predictor collateral attach offense.13 With exception used consistently measures offenses. See, e. g., 68-70, 1888; Frank States, 395 147, 149, 89 1503, 1505, 162 (1969); Moreland, 258 U.S, 433, 42 368, 66 700 (1922). Imprisonment offenses; possess characteristics By contrast, standard, demonstrates, denies suffer 36 Second, administration. avoids necessity time-consuming consideration attendant inaccurate predictions, unequal treatment, apparent bias. These Powell's concurrence 52-55, 2020-2021, echoed scholarly criticism decision.14 emphasizes defects, arguing force implementation assuredly lead violations Equal Protection Clauses Brief 47-59. Finally, ensures abrogate legislative judgments concerning appropriate Under 38 "[t]he forced trial—and evidence—whether forego entirely judicial discretion abandon responsibility full punishments legislature. alternatives, assuming availability vested proceed counsel." 53, 2020 39 respects allocation functions between legislatures administration system. 40 reason concern economic burden might place But, respect, speculative. 41 role enforcing guarantees dependent budgetary decisions governments. Mayer 404 189, 196-197, 410, 416, (1971), rejecting proposed fiscal justification free transcripts appeals appellant imprisonment: "This misconceives Griffin [v. 351 12, 76 585, 100 891 (1956)] balance needs interests society; flat prohibition pricing effective appeal able own way. invidiousness discrimination exists procedures erased differences sentences State's is, irrelevant."15 43 event, extent alleged admits, ante, 373-374, persons felonies, smaller percentage attorney time.16 44 Furthermore, public defender systems economically feasible, establishment replace private attorneys keep acceptable levels requiring increases dramatically.17 alternative answers clog inexperienced 45 Perhaps refutation respondent's alarmist prophecies wreak havoc produced substantial authorized—States include large country's population diversity environments.18 yet authorized, periods longer days,19 months,20 months21 fact, under current States.22 46 governments re-examine statutes. legislature determine desired authorize certain minor light expense meeting re-examination long overdue.23 inevitably re-examination, responsibility. IV 47 turns head. restricts perhaps right,24 narrowly admittedly trial.25 abstract pretext "constitutional another," 372, camouflage anomalous reaches. Today's reminds Black's description Brady "an anachronism handed down" "ma[kes] abrupt break well-considered precedents." 345, 796. 48 BLACKMUN, 49 substantially BRENNAN Parts dissenting secured Amendments. prosecuted months' imprisonment, see (1968); subjected (1972). resolution, feel, "bright line" prosecutors, deserve and, time, reconcile led 51 On approach, course, upholding reversed, constitutionally I, dissent. Compare, Potts Estelle, 529 F.2d 450 (CA5 1976); ex rel. Winnie Harris, 75 Wis.2d 547, 249 N.W.2d 791 (1977), Sweeten Sneddon, 463 713 (CA10 1972); Rollins 299 So.2d 586 (Fla.), cert. denied, 419 1009, 95 328, 283 (1974). (1969). statute, question, part: "A first property exceeding $150 value exceed penal institution penitentiary year, second subsequent type theft, years. Respondent O.T. 1971, 70-5015, p. 12. note awareness various options. Both Legal Aid Society amicus curiae, argued pertain underlying 4; York Amicus Curiae 5-11. amici guarantee. Solicitor General finally adopted—that 22-24. Unfortunately, extensive empirical work done. unduly burdensome. Ingraham, Impact Argersinger—One Year Later, Law & Soc.Rev. 615 jurisdictions difficulty it. Krantz, C. Smith, D. Rossman, Froud J. Hoffman, Criminal Cases 1-18 (1976). initial appeal, transcript use appeal. parties indigency 270-272, 174-175, 881-882; Ill.App.3d 304, 307-308, 343 517, 520 "[The Amendment] embodies realistic recognition truth average legal skill himself brought tribunal power take life wherein presented experienced learned simple, untrained layman appear intricate, complex mysterious." Johnson Zerbst, 304 458, 462-463, 58 1019, 1022, 82 1461 (1938). be, little avail comprehend educated sometimes science If incapable, generally, indictment good bad. unfamiliar evidence. Left aid put incompetent evidence, inadmissible. lacks knowledge adequately perfect step Without guilty, faces danger how innocence. men intelligence, ignorant illiterate, feeble intellect." 68-69, 64, (1932). 31, 2009, 'It arguable, nor ever secret, charges, attendance witnesses behalf.' 28, 2008, Junker, Misdemeanor Cases, Wash.L.Rev. 685, 705 (1968). Cf. re Oliver, 333 257, 499, 682 (1948) (right trial); Pointer Texas, 380 400, 85 1065, 923 (1965) confrontation); Klopfer North Carolina, 386 213, 87 988, (1967) speedy Washington 388 14, 1920, 1019 compulsory witnesses); Groppi Wisconsin, 400 505, 91 490, 571 (1971) jury). "While limiting 'deep commitment' 'serious cases,' dimensions. nothing history, indicate intended embody retraction previously provided." 30, 2009 citations 2009; 377, 3. "Mr. [requiring presence insure trial] raised situations prospect need involved, 27, 30-31, 36, 2007, 2012, 5; 2, 63, 2016, 2025 Because implies dishonesty, impeaching testimony proceeding. People Stufflebean, 1068-1169, 322 488, 491-492 jurors "fair character" "approved integrity," 78, (1975), excluded Twelve occupations licensed city Chicago ordinances license applicant "good equivalent background qualification unsatisfied Council Lawyers, Study Licensing Restrictions Ex-Offenders City 8, A-17 bar working capacity bank insured Deposit Insurance Corporation, U.S.C. 1829, possibly employment security clearance. CFR §§ 155.5(h) (i), 156.7(b)(1)(iii) 796, (1963); supra 713-714. My joined Rehnquist, supports explicitly 2016-2017, preference 47, 2017, 2025. procedures: [whether appointed] formally pleads; resolved pleas required. case, preserved review." 10, supra. scope permissible remains unsettled, uncertainty another source generated standard. 35-37; White, 1390 (CA8 Note, Collateral Use Prior Convictions Indigents Unrepresented Trial, Ohio St.L.J. 168 Froyd Cases: Mandate 69-117 (1976); advocated criticized unworkable administrative impose. Uniform Rules Procedure, Rule 321(b), Comment, U.L.A. 69 Bounds 430 817, 825, 97 1491, 1496, 52 72 70 (1974) (estimates 10% opposed 60%-65% meet standard); National Defender Assn., Other Face Justice, Note pp. 82-83 (1973) (survey indicates 65% 47% cases). Advisory Commission Standards Goals caseload 150 per year. Goals, Courts, Standard 13.12, 276-277 (1973). Table 109, 73. study conducted introduced Public System Wisconsin reduced $150-$200 $90 using appointing Assn. 10-12. Alaska: Alaska Const., Art. 1, 11; Stat.Ann. 18.85.100 (any incarceration; valuable heavy fine); Alexander Anchorage, 490 P.2d 910 (Alaska 1971); Arizona: Ariz.Rule Crim.Proc. 6.1(b) punishment liberty; concludes requires); California: Cal.Penal Code Ann. 987 (West Supp.1978) (all cases); Connecticut: Conn.Gen.Stat. 51-296(a), 51-297(f) (1979) actions); Delaware: Del.Code Ann., Tit. 4602 arrest requests orders); Hawaii: Haw.Rev.Stat. 802-1 (1976) confinement jail); Indiana: Ind.Const., prosecutions); Bolkovac 229 Ind. 294, 250 (1951); Kentucky: Ky.Rule 8.04 (offenses imprisonment); Louisiana: La.Code Crim.Proc., 513 Massachusetts: Mass.Sup.Jud.Ct. 3:10 imposed); Minnesota: Minn.Stat. 609.02, 611.14 (1978) (felonies "gross misdemeanors"; defines $100); Hampshire: N.H.Rev.Stat.Ann. 604-A:2, 625:9 (1974 Supp.1977) Mexico: N.M.Stat.Ann. 41-22A-12 (Supp.1975) (offense York: N.Y.Crim.Proc.Law 170.10(3) (McKinney 1971) violations); Weinstock, 80 Misc.2d 510, 363 N.Y.S.2d 878 (traffic Oklahoma: Okl.Stat., 22, 464 (1969) Stewart 495 834 (Cr.App.1972); Oregon: Brown Multnomah County Dist. Ct., Or.App. 917, 566 522 (1977) South Dakota: S.D.Comp.Laws 23-2-1 (Supp.1978) action); Tennessee: Tenn.Code 40-2002, 40-2003 (1975) (persons whatsoever); Texas: Tex.Code Crim.Proc.Ann., 26.04 (Vernon 1966) Virginia: Va.Code 19.2-157, 19.2-160 (misdemeanors Washington: Wash. Crim.Rule 2.11(a)(1) liberty); West W.Va.Code 62-3-1a crime); Wisconsin: Wis.Const., 7; incarceration). claims read imprisonable cases." 28. unambiguous ambiguities suggest list short, trivial E. Colorado: Colo.Rev.Stat. 21-1-103 municipal code defender); Georgia: Ga.Code 27-3203 ordinance incarceration); Missouri: Mo.Op.Atty.Gen. 207 (1963) (counsel "more significance" "when prejudice result"); Montana: Mont.Rev.Codes 95-1001 (court assign "in justice"); Nevada: Nev.Rev.Stat. 178.397 misdemeanors" felonies); Jersey: N.J.Stat.Ann. 2A:158A-2 N.J.Crim.Rule 3:27-1 indictable); Pennsylvania: Pa.Rules 316(a)-(c) (in "summary cases"); Wyoming: Wyo.Stat. 7-1-110(a) (entitled "serious crimes"), 7-1-108(a)(v) (serious "practical possibility"), 7-9-105 penitentiary) addition, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi until Fifth Circuit's Thomas Savage, 536 1975). discretionary authority perceived (e. Maryland, Missouri, Montana, Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania). Iowa: Iowa 3; 42, Maryland: Md.Ann.Code, 27A, 2(f) (h), Mississippi: Miss.Code 99-15-15 Idaho: Idaho 19-851 (Supp.1978); Mahler Birnbaum, 501 282 (1972); Maine: Newell 277 A.2d 731 (1971); Ohio: 44(A) (B); Rhode Island: R.I.Rule (Super.Ct.); (Dist.Ct.); Holliday, 109 R.I. 93, 280 Utah: Utah 77-64-2 (1978); Salt Lake Corp. 211 nn. 18-21, figure closer governed "likelihood standard: Arkansas: Ark.Rule 8.2(b) determines circumstances Florida: Fla.Rule 3.111(b) written statement Carolina: N.C.Gen.Stat. 7A-451(a) (Supp.1977) adjudged); N.D.Rule nonfelony magistrate Vermont: Vt.Stat.Ann., 13, 5201, 5231 period $1,000 imposed). Two "constitutionally required": Alabama: Ala.Code 15-12-1, 15-12-20 (1975); S.C.Code 17-3-10 (Supp.1977). Some reacting Kansas: Giddings, 216 Kan. 531 445 Michigan: Studaker, 387 Mich. 698, 199 177 Mich.App. 217, 206 478 (1973); Nebraska: Kovarik Banner, 192 Neb. 816, 224 761 Krantz et al., 445-606. Lakeside Oregon, 435 333, 341, 1091, 1096, 55 319 (1978). "[T]he protected guilt innocence determined jury—tempering arbitrary harsh prosecutorial power—while important, 46, 2017 result) (footnotes

Category: 0