Legal Document

369 U.S. 506 82 Supreme Court Reporter 884 8 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 70 Willard CARNLEY, Petitioner,v.H. G. COCHRAN, Jr., Director of the Division Corrections, State Florida. Number 158. Argued Feb. 20 and 21, 1962. Decided April 30, Harold Atlantic Ward, III, Winter Park, Fla., for petitioner. James Mahorner, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, respondent, pro hac vice. Mr. Justice BRENNAN delivered opinion Court. 1 The petitioner, who was not afforded assistance counsel his defense at trial, claims that, this reason, conviction by a jury in Record Escambia County, Florida, deprived him rights guaranteed Fourteenth Amendment. He obtained provisional writ habeas corpus from Florida on petition asserting that claim. However, court, petition, respondent's return petitioner's reply—but without any hearing—discharged writ. 123 So.2d 249. Since an important constitutional right is involved, we granted certiorari appointed to represent petitioner 366 958, 81 1927, 6 1253, 368 806, 43. 2 might well have materially aided coping with several aspects case. charged non-capital offenses incestuous sexual intercourse 13-year-old daughter and, separate count relating same acts, fondling minor child, is, assault lewd, lascivious indecent manner, upon female child under age 14. At time trial two sets criminal statutes contained language reaching such behavior. Sections 741.22 800.04, Statutes, 1959, F.S.A., were generally provisions separately defining incest lascivious, manner. In addition, both included within later enacted Chapter 801 Statutes—Florida's so-called Child Molester Act—if victim 14 years or younger.1 plainly conceived prosecution as having been Act. 250. While obviously plausible view, lawyer, but layman, perceived because Act invoked against respect conduct elsewhere specifically defined criminal, 1954 decision Copeland versus State, 76 137, raised doubts, Constitution, validity based Act.2 picture further complicated fact had no reference prior amendment made subsequent alleged offense.3 3 Establishing basis vitally protection rights. If validly applied could assisted invoking behalf special law governing disposition defendants it. 800.04 authorize only jail sentences. contrast, empowers sentencing judge proper case commit convicted defendant state hospital treatment rehabilitation.4 That also permits accused psychiatric psychological examination purpose assisting court case.5 4 There are thus present considerations sort often deemed sufficient require conclusion crime did measure up requirements See, e.g., Chewning Cunningham, 443, 446—447, 498, 7 442; Reynolds Cochran, 365 525, 531—532, 723, 5 754; McNeal Culver, 109, 114—116, 413, 445; Rice Olson, 324 786, 789—791, 65 989, 89 L.Ed. 1367. Other record support claim unfairness trying affording help lawyer. As must be case, effectively discharge roles counsel. Here shows efforts assist there omissions guidance he gave. fully apprise vital procedural which laymen expected know doubtless would called attention. significant. Cash 358 633, 637—638, 79 432, 557; Gibbs Burke, 337 773, 776—778, 69 1247, 93 1686; Hudson North Carolina, 363 697, 702—703, 80 1314, 1500. Despite allegation 'the petitioners carefully instructed regard Constitution States6 procedures followed during course trial,' it appears while advised need testify, told what consequences follow if testify. chose testify brought out cross-examination. For lawyers, commonplace weigh risk revelation cross-examination record, when advising whether take stand own behalf; question decided ignorance consideration. Nor does appear examine prospective jurors voir dire, submit proposed instructions jury, object given. circumstances attending serve accentuate Petitioner illiterate. interpose single objection trial. witnesses 15-year-old son. Although wife testified they experienced disciplinary problems children, clearly revealed possibly significant avenue impeachment children's testimony, worthy name.7 We hold one counsel, unless intelligently understandingly waived him, therefore consider waive show offered declined Cf. Moore Michigan, 355 155, 160—161, 78 191, 167. Nevertheless, imputed waiver benefit ground stated court's follows: 'If * *, will presumed *.' 251. This mean suffered deprivation formally requested failure make request contrary. But settled where requisite, furnished depend request.8 supra, countered denial 'petitioner's violated refusal appoint behalf,' noted silent request. held grants proceedings 'whether appointment Uveges Commonwealth Pennsylvania, 335 437, 441, 184, 185, 127.' 111, note 1, 415. See 788, 990; 780, 1250. 9 may meant depends formal very present, assumed offer declined.9 Or, assume simply knew willing forego Of course, presumptions immediately has way protecting them except requesting counsel—a formality just said depend. answer say counter collateral attack showing—if can—that agreed, willing, tried To cast burden wholly war standard proof laid down Johnson Zerbst, 304 458, 464—465, 58 1019, 1461: 10 'It pointed 'courts indulge every reasonable presumption waiver' fundamental 'do presume acquiescene loss rights.' 11 'The represented invokes, itself, accused—whose life liberty stake—is duty imposes serious weighty responsibility determining intelligent competent accused. should determined fitting appropriate determination record.' 12 principles declared Zerbst equally applicable asserted waivers proceedings. pleaded guilty burglary charge. right. affirming relief, wrote "It necessary waiver; ordinarily implied fails assigned particularly voluntarily pleads guilty." even plea implication, treated conclusive presumption, 'inconsistent our interpretation scope Amendment,' 'A entitled necessary.' 990. recognized Olson although Amendment countenance appearance silence request, entry issue hearing required since facts dispute. however, plea, allege affirmative waiver.10 Therefore, disputed requiring hearing. Presuming impermissible. show, evidence rejected offer. Anything less waiver. 13 Neither Bute Illinois, 333 640, 68 763, 92 986 nor inconsistent holding here. Bute, right, expressly disclaimed rationale. It nature charge reception recited call into play constitutionally protected Moore, showed judge, preponderance acquiescence sufficiently understanding amount effective can imposed record—or hearing, required—reveals acquiescence. Where, infirmity manifest, allegation, much showing, waiver, relief unconstitutional conviction. judgment reversed cause remanded opinion. 15 Reversed remanded. 16 HARLAN concurs result. 17 FRANKFURTER took part 18 WHITE consideration 19 BLACK, concurring. & N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions concur Court's reversal agree reasons its was, doctrine announced Betts Brady, 316 455, 62 1252, 86 1595, 1942, indigent Federal provided 'by appraisal totality given case' provide particular constituted 'a fairness, shocking universal sense justice Id., 462, 1256. dissented announcement considered impossibly vague unpredictable standard. Among other grounds thought my belief makes Sixth Amendment's guarantee 'In all prosecutions, shall Assistance Counsel defence.' still view. 21 Twenty years' experience federal courts Brady rule demonstrated basic guide. Indeed, served guide confuse person prosecuted Little more expected, nothing than perplexing appointing lawyers believes do so 'shocking justice.' sure, recent fairly consistent assuring gone compelled reverse convictions either new determine erroneously denied1 result due growing recognition Bill Rights correct assuming layman defend himself prosecution. cannot bring their cases us. And look records right-to-counsel understand capriciousness justice' bestows persons crime.2 think now abandon vague, fickle court. recognizing reason unequivocal virtue 1461. these many reasons, including those set 117, 445, Douglas joined Brennan, overrule doing Powell Alabama, 287 45, 69, 53 55, 77 158, '* heard be, cases, little avail comprehend counsel.' am aware statement capital protects life, liberty, property stake 22 THE CHIEF JUSTICE DOUGLAS, joining Court, join 23 24 wish add word gave 117—119, overruling 1595. 25 Petitioner, admitted illiterate,* forced try six-man jury. impaneled. challenge individual veniremen, panel whole, challenged anyone exercised six peremptory challenges law. Fla.Stat., § 913.08, F.S.A. 26 certain whole. Such writing. Fla.Stats., 913.01, tells us write. could, doubtful able improper method selection discrimination, confined lengthy period five months spent solitary confinement. opportunity, therefore, gather factual sustain possible panel. statute, moreover, explicitly requires written specify based. Ibid. 27 Had write, access facts, not, probability, build legal argument man low intelligence. Some challenging turn difficult questions law, legislature passed special, local, providing summoning impaneling grand petit jurors. Article 20, prohibits 'special' laws. always clear, though, 'general.' Hysler 132 Fla. 200, 181 Southern KF135 S69 350; 209, 354; ex rel. Green Pearson, 153 314, 565. sophisticated arguments almost beyond comprehension unlearned 28 abatement usual manner testing legality list. some proceeding mandamus remedy, claimed county commissioners erred selected Jackson Jordan, 101 616, 135 138. Often simple oral juror achieve much, contends venireman 'qualifications law.' 913.03(1), Yet illiterate niceties procedure. 29 Assuming decide peremptorily cause, then how secure maximum challenges. least independent cause. 913.03, Ignorance defense. Denmark 43 182, 31 269; McNish 47 36 176; Webster 108, 584. Objections qualifications appeal. supra; Crosby 90 381, 106 741. 30 Where excuses motion, object. timely made, therefor stated. too late once excused. Ellis 702, 768. On appeal, action prejudicial, abuse discretion. Williams 45 128, 34 279; Peadon 46 124, 35 204. difficulties facing end commenting weight evidence, Lester 37 382, 232; Leavine 109 447, 147 897; Seward 59 529, expressing convicted, Wood 221, 539, lest influence decision. comment, exception, error appeal (Surrency 48 59, 575; Smith 56, 61 120), interests served. Kellum 104 99 (Fla.Ct.App.3d Dist.). 32 Hearsay takes added importance trials. excluded prejudicial. Owens 483, 651; Alvarez 75 286, 272. objection, regarded received consent. Sims 38, 52 198. An after answered sometimes come late. Schley 53, 518; 138, 50 749; supra. motion strike Dickens 17, 38 909. rapid-fire exchange answers witness, oftentime find helpless conceive hearsay lie. constitutes itself question, judges agree. Royal 127 320, 170 450. 33 Once in, before final made. Judge's following enable obtain clearer accurate conception duties wait until hear judge.' Smithie 88 70, 76, 276, 278. exception procedure adopted Defects likewise waived, objection. White 122 340 (Fla.Ct.App.2d Dist.); 117 473. Intricate rules restricted trials Similar rules, complex confusing found States. vigor defending himself, so, projected faces labyrinth never negotiate. result, system—pride English-speaking world—becomes trap utterly ability ends justice. 741.22, F.S.A.: 'Punishment incest.—Persons degrees consanguinity marriages prohibited void, intermarry adultery fornication each other, punished imprisonment prison exceeding twenty years, year.' 'Lewd, act presence child.—Any handle, fondle male fourteen knowingly lewd intent rape female, felony ten years.' 801.02, 'Definitions.—An offense chapter include attempted rape, sodomy, crimes nature, behavior, incest, (when completed attempted) battery attempted), acts committed against, to, under.' inclusion Act—with attendant alteration younger—ran afoul embraced distinct dealt statutes, failed forth length general tanto amended, title give notice changed. see Buchanan Fla.App., 111 51, District Appeal upheld conduct. Laws, E.S.1957, 57—1990. 801.03(1), 'Powers convictions.— '(1) When meaning chapter, power jurisdiction to: '(a) Sentence term exceed twenty-five Raiford. '(b) Commit rehabilitation hospital, institution sent color possesses security facility prescribed board institutions. When, created established research center shall, instead committing center. may, discretion, stay defer imposition sentence pending accordance outlined chapter.' 801.08, %.f.s.a./: 'Execution suspended; probation; requirements.— whose suspend execution place probation. '(2) placing probation revoke order impose commitment '(3) No placed continue satisfied regular psychiatric, psychotherapeutic counseling help, helping reports intervals officer costs, fees charges tried.' 801.10, 'Examination; for, order.—When purview heretofore report filed clerk initiative, interested person, out.' Emphasis original. testified: 'We firm them, seemed like got, older kids, couldn't pressure, would, Daddy get something about doings, well, oldest boy say, 'Well, Daddy, you sure regret other,' girl mad flirtified she opinion.' entire wife, codefendant, 'CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. WILLARD CARNLEY: 'Q. Carol Jean, your mother, went arrangements casket sister? 'A. Yes. You did? sure. Well, tell Joe Gayfer's house— 'THE COURT: Wait minute, sir, testifying. chance rests. Any ask daughter, welcome MRS. PEARL don't recall got maturity Mother wrong teach wrong? Yes, taught me wrong. 'THEREUPON witness J.W., time, realize whenever Century Dad's sickness moved springtime, sick stomach taken employment? sick. supposed that. excused.' occasion settle Or justified believing perfectly unnecessary explicit accused's rejection Petitioner's obviously, tantamount return's already canvassed, equivalent rights, transcript, inspection reveals instruction Hamilton 52, 157, 114; 1500; 167; Pennsylvania Herman Claudy, 350 116, 223, 100 126; Massey 348 105, 145, 135; 127; Townsend 334 736, 1690; Wade Mayo, 672, 1270, 1647; Marino Ragen, 332 561, 240, 170; De Meerleer People 329 663, 67 596, 91 584; Tomkins Missouri, 323 485, 370, 407; Kaiser, 471, 363, 398. cf. Quicksall 339 660, 910, 94 1188; Gryger 728, 1256, 1683; 986; Foster 134, 1716, 1955. Compare, Flansburg D.C., 55 F.Supp. 959, aff'd grounds, Cir., 144 Reporter, 2nd 917, 55; Parker Ellis, 258 937, 145; Henderson Bannan, 256 Savini Jackson, 250 349. Numerous examples cited contrast between decisions lower erroneous rule. denied application With unable themselves, conclusively concluded, illiteracy alone necessarily import ordinary things money bank. Apparently classifying 'commonplace life,' concluded showing 'suffered slightest lack intelligence.' 249, (Petitioner's below, party certiorari.)

Classification Label: 0