Document: 332 U.S. 145 67 S.Ct. 1711 91 L.Ed. 1962 GAYESv.STATE OF NEW YORK. No. 405. Argued May 2, 1947. Decided June 23, Rehearing Denied Oct. 13, See 68 27. Mr. Herbert Wechsler, of New York City, for petitioner. Harry L. Rosenthal, Rochester, N.Y., respondent. Justice FRANKFURTER announced the judgment Court in an opinion which CHIEF JUSTICE, REED and JACKSON join. 1 This is another case release sought from confinement under a sentence by State court following plea guilty, on claim denial due process law through want benefit counsel. 2 The circumstances are these. On July 15, 1938, Gayes, then lad 16, was arraigned County Monroe County, York, upon indictment charging burglary third degree petty larceny. According to record conviction, he asked, accordance with requirement § 308 Code Criminal Procedure, whether 'he desired aid counsel,' answered 'No.'1 Imposition postponed 28. When that day Gayes appeared judgment, again according requirements law, had any legal cause show, why should not be pronounced against him.' 480. And 'No sufficient appearing,' continues, committed Vocational School dealt there law. It appears facts before us did stay at this correctional institution as long would have authorized his detention. Penal Law, Consol.Laws, c. 40, §§ 2184—a 2189, connection 407. For October 14, 1941, pleaded Schenectady, new charge degree. latter proceeding does indicate time or represented But no made it, has infirmity 2184-a sentenced second offender inclusion improper vocational school 1938. 3 In procedure, pro se, filed application vacate rendered him 28, He claimed proceedings led been informed 'Constitutional Rights Assistance Counsel,' 'could understood rights Counsel' 'youths age 16 years cannot Intelligently Competently waive their rights.' Since, claim, first void, challenged validity 1941 because length partly based 1938 conviction. 4 Upon record, county denied motion without opinion. As stood, review could determination. People v. Gersewitz, 294 N.Y. 163, 61 N.E.2d 427. highest purposes our review. Canizio 327 82, 85, 66 452, 453, 90 545. see Chapter 706 Laws 1947, amending Cr.Proc. 517. We brought here, 329 710, 365, one series, further consideration imply duty supply counsel defendants prosecutions. 5 guiding principles bearing general problem set forth Foster Illinois, 134, 1716, just decided. Insofar present particular variant, they controlled decision supra. held whatever doubts may arise if, imposed, opportunities required Constitution meeting implications satisfied, must stand. so, questions raised regarding attending imposition Gayes' commitment now open. complaining guilty 1941.2 What wants relieved imprisonment sentence. That sentence, sure, took into account earlier subsequent offender, full opportunity, so far appears, contest when fact included serving.3 Since leading up now, United States concerned, flank attack, challenge 6 Judgment affirmed. 7 BURTON concurs result. 8 RUTLEDGE, whom BLACK, DOUGLAS, MURPHY concur, dissenting. 9 A year old boy, indigent alone, relatives, friends, money and, undenied allegations petition, knowledge constitutional rights,1 specifying two highly technical distinct charges,2 crime degree.3 property charged intending steal4 consisted cigarettes value 75 cents, flashlights worth $1.00, $3.00 currency. imposed served.5 confined offense similar character 1941,6 19 also friends appears.7 10 One part case, I understand, takes view attack forever foreclosed doing issues presented although suffering consequences sentence.8 conclusion reliance placed authorities; indeed, read state cases, Court's face rulings procedure petitioner followed appropriate raising presents.9 11 am unwilling subscribe such doctrine forfeitures concerning rights, extreme seems me shocking. 12 Under all decisions passed question,10 proper apparently necessary Keller, Gen.Sess.N.Y. 37 N.Y.S.2d 61, 62, attacking ground former conviction invalid, imposing initial after if successful attacked vacated.11 other words, situated petitioner, overturn where it obtained, can founded 13 my reasonable within power require, least both offenses taken place its jurisdiction. know reason disregard override it. Much less province invert effect dubious suggestion petitioner's perhaps saved some 'that discloses than those us,' presumably it.12 14 No cited or, seem contrary authorities above,13 support view. Nor anything said done 545, indeed matter ever function. relevance either prescribing issue. only defendant moved withdraw prior prejudiced convicting court's previous failure inform right 15 nothing do open convicted challenging invalid federal reasons. facts, merits, were very different here. Whereas, among things, here altogether trial, but none trial offense. think cover wholly situation this. rule that, person never counsel, later conceivably might applied cures denial, more particularly treated better during first, moreover preliminary showing invalid. state, Court, say increasing shall frontally, perchance way. Indeed, controlling us, so-called 'flank' clear violation presents, we neither foreclose avenue nor substitute dubiously available own manufacture. 17 reversed. Subsequent review, minutes original came light. By stipulation these them, precise question put Assistant District Attorney presence Judge was, 'Do you need lawyer enter indictment?' To replied, 'No, sir.' inconclusively debated asked 'if stated entry lawyer?' disposition, difference significance becomes immaterial, immaterial whether, difference, consider, even involving belated detention, whose differences exist between formal acceptance what actually contemporaneously lends foce caution frequently expressed every intendment observance rendering judgments collaterally attacked, often considerable passage time. detained Schenectady. would, court. asking invalidation underlying Schenectady step getting relief detention treating proceeding, purposes, seeking, effect, regard distinctions otherwise relevant. State, makes appealed higher courts. contradicted courts York. ruled limited authority apply resentenceon defect (Gen.Sess.N.Y.County), Paterno, 182 Misc. 491, 50 713 (Chatauqua Court). Neither however, vitiated sentencing consider claim. certainly duly advised defendant, pleading raise invalidity secure opportunity appropriately invalidity. Nothing herein decided precludes us. An order reviewable Supreme certain instances Appeals. answer petition determined pleadings hearing appearance court, allegation 'desired 'no' belief pay lawyer's fee, is, course, true absence evidence tendered hearing. count 'broke entered building garage Francis Marolow * intent commit therein larceny'; petit larceny described text above. Institute, unspecified term carried maximum years, N.Y.Penal 407(3). count, theft, being respect broke Petitioner note 3, until December 1943, Board Parole directed service begin. date termination 6, correspondingly postponed. 20 mandatory. Law 1941. Had rather allowed 407, sent reformatory prison. 2185. 'Record Conviction' offense, contained having arraigned, ithdrew th guilty. recited 'having clerk show him, shown' appearing thereupon pronounced. There recital manner, admonished plea. notes 5, infra text. infra. determination state's tribunal determining Cf. West A.T. & T. Co., 311 223, 179, 85 139, 132 A.L.R. 956. If move resentencing ex rel. Sloane Lawes, 255 112, 174 N.E. 80; Carollo Brophy, 540, 63 95; Gen.Sess.N.Y.County, 61. forum employed. Bernoff, Misc., 46; Foster, 73, 42 831; 187 56, 60 813, compare 713; cf. 167, 427, 428, 429; supra, Gen. Sess.N.Y.County, page 63. conjunction suggest establishing basis unable unless untenable criminal procedures utilizing them binding determinations same extent civil matters. Only justified forum. Not established 11, expressly qualified possibly 'upon statement 'the open.' pertinent inquire chance, local prescribed follow permitted state. 11.

Category: 0