Legal Document

417 U.S. 600 94 Supreme Court Reporter 2437 41 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 341 Fred R. ROSS and North Carolina, Petitioners,v.Claude Franklin MOFFITT. Number 73—786. Argued April 22, 1974. Decided June 17, Syllabus Respondent, an indigent, while represented by court-appointed counsel, was convicted of forgery in state court two separate cases, his convictions were affirmed on appeals right the Carolina Appeals. In one case he denied appointment counsel for discretionary review Court, other case, after that had certiorari, to prepare a petition certiorari this Court. Subsequently, Federal District habeas corpus relief, but Appeals reversed, holding respondent entitled both State Held: 1. The Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment does not require provide with appeal Pp. 609—611. (a) As contrasted trial stage criminal proceeding, defendant appealing conviction needs attorney, as shield protect him against being 'haled into court' stripped presumption innocence, rather sword upset prior determination guilt, difference significant since, may dispense without defendant's consent, it need any at all. 610—611. (b) fact has been provided automatically mean then acts unfairly refusing indigent defendants every way, unfairness results only if singles out indigents denies them meaningful access appellate system because their poverty. Pacific KF135 P2 611. 2. Nor Equal Protection free seeking 611—616. A respondent's circumstances is simply appoint aid court, since stage, under Carolina's multi-tiered system, will have, very least, transcript or record proceedings, brief setting forth claims error, frequently opinion disposing materials which, when supplemented pro se submission might be made, would adequate basis its decision grant deny standards whether 'significant public interest,' involves 'legal principles major significance,' likely conflicts previous decision. 614—615. Both opportunity have initial nature Court's make relative handicap such comparison wealthy defendant, who far less than borne right, Douglas versus California, 372 353, 83 814, 9 811. 616. (c) That particular service benefit constitutionally required, duty duplicate legal arsenal privately retained continuing effort reverse conviction, assure done here, present fairly context State's process. 3. Similarly, file where prepared together perhaps opinions available order decide certiorari. 616—618. Since seek conferred federal statutes State, argument having once created must give all persons equal enjoy terms inapplicable. Griffin Illinois, 351 12, 76 585, 100 L.Ed. 891, supra, distinguished. 617. suggestion responsible providing petitioning initiated prosecution leading judgment sought reviewed unsupported either reason authority. 617—618. 4 Cir., 483 Reporter, 2nd 650, reversed. Jacob L. Safron, Raleigh, N.C., petitioners. Thomas baron Anderson, Jr., Durham, respondent. Mr. Justice REHNQUIST delivered 1 We are asked 811 (1963), which requires first should extended applications Fourth Circuit held required Clauses Amendment.1 2 * now before us resulted from consolidation prosecutions brought respective Superior Courts counties Mecklenburg Guilford. cases pleaded guilty charges uttering forged instrument, indigency counsel. He took Appeals, again affirmed.2 At point procedural histories diverge. 3 Following affirmance County invoke procedures His approached about possible represent appeal, informed furnish petition. Respondent collateral relief courts, raising right-to-counsel contention filed Western February 1971. Relief time, dismissed stipulation allow exhaust remedies issue. After exhausting remedies, reapplied denied. appealed denial Circuit. Guilford charges, also On however, defender appointed appeal. certiorari.3 unsuccessfully petitioned writ post-conviction throughout courts. these motions denied, time Middle F.Supp. 853. 5 reversed judgments, assistance expense Reviewing benefits stated: 6 'As long provides allows felons higher help there marked absence fairness denying seeks same court.'4 7 This principle equally applicable petitions For, said '(t)he concepts equality, subsequent appeals.'5 8 granted 414 1128, 864, 38 752, consider Appeals' light apparently conflicting decisions Seventh Tenth Circuits.6 For reasons hereafter stated we II past 20 years, given extensive consideration rights 891 (1956), pertinent Illinois rule allowing error procured testimony adduced trial.7 No exception made thus unable pay cost obtaining precluded asserted error. Frankfurter, cast deciding vote, concurring opinion: 10 '. . decreed can afford stenographic minutes errors Court.' Id., S.Ct., 592. 11 discrimination violated Amendment. 12 Succeeding invalidated similar financial barriers process, reaffirming traditional obliged defendants. McKane Durston, 153 684, 14 913, 867 (1894). encompassed variety common theme. example, Lane Brown, 477, 768, 892 involved Indiana provision declaring could obtain hearing coram nobis application. If declined request one, prisoner no recourse. Draper Washington, 487, 774, 899 permitted satisfied judge contentions frivolous. effect bound court's conclusions frivolousness, equivalent him. Smith Bennett, 365 708, 81 895, 39 (1961), Iowa filing fee process application Burns Ohio, 360 252, 79 1164, 1209 (1959), Ohio $20 move leave affirming conviction. Each state-imposed adjudication violate 13 discussed above stand proposition cannot arbitrarily cut off leaving open avenues more affluent persons. decided day Lane, Draper, departed somewhat limited doctrine undertook examination indigent's adequate. concluded fulfill responsibility toward merely waiving own requirements procure go further right. It extend today. Petitioners Douglas, each whom jury felony counts, California Appeal. exacted them, arguments Appeal, therefore them. Petitioners, claimed they use state-compensated indigent. examined initiative, following then-existing "no good whatever served counsel." U.S., 355, 815. petitioners' 15 unconstitutional California's requirement determined helpful itself. noted initially merits organization By contrast, greater means faced preliminary 'ex parte record,' id., 356, 816, presented fully briefed form. noted, went say: 16 'We Appeal sustained lies within discretion. But appropriate observe can, consistently Amendment, differences so result amount due 'invidious discrimination.' Williamson Lee Optical Co., 348 483, 489, 75 461, 465, 99 563; Page 18, 590. Absolute equality required; lines drawn often sustain them.' 356—357, 816. 17 precise rationale never explicitly stated, some support derived Amendment.8 Neither itself entirely satisfactory reached, depending different inquiry emphasizes factors. 'Due process' between individual dealing regardless how individuals situation treated. 'Equal protection,' hand, disparity treatment classes whose situations arguably indistinguishable. address issues separately succeeding sections. III 18 Recognition found dissenting Harlan. '(w)hen forced run gantlet showing merit, comport fair procedure.' 357, Harlan thought issue worthy consideration, remarking: 'The real question & N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions submit, permits analysis, rule, applied consistent procedure guaranteed Clause.' 363, 819. 19 do believe fundamental binding upon virtue Sixth Amendments. Gideon Wainwright, 335, 792, 799 (1963). stages proceeding. purpose view convert person presumed innocent beyond reasonable doubt. To accomplish purpose, employs prosecuting attorney presents evidence challenges witnesses offered argues rulings makes direct persuade guilt. Under 'reason reflection recognize our adversary justice, haled too poor hire lawyer, assured unless him.' 344, 796. ordinarily initiates fend efforts prosecutor overturn finding guilt below. for, agree proceedings clear way. supra. Unfairness singled profitably considered protection analysis. IV 21 Language invoking notions prominent treating 22 '(W)here think line rich poor.' (Emphasis original.) 23 terms: 24 '(O)nce chooses establish foreclose phase poverty.' 257, 1168. 25 Despite tendency 'to declare themselves absolute logical extreme,'9 obviously limits analysis pressed doing violence recognized 'does precisely advantages,' San Antonio Independent School Rodriguez, 411 1, 24, 93 1278, 1291, 36 (1973), nor 'equalize economic conditions.' 23, 592 (Frankfurter, J., concurring). 'free unreasoned distinctions,' Rinaldi Yeager, 384 305, 310, 86 1497, 1500, 577 (1966), system. supra; adopt 'entirely all,' indigency, 481, 771, 'meaningless ritual' others better 'meaningful appeal.' 358, 817. absolutes, degrees. Clause, interpreted take 26 Atlantic systems almost half States,10 multitiered, intermediate effective January 1967, and, like intended absorb substantial share case-load previously burdening directly involve sentence death life imprisonment, N.C.Gen.Stat. § 7A—27 (1969 Supp.1973). second '(1) (w)hich arising Constitution (2) (i)n dissent. .' 7A—30 (1969). All basis. 27 statute governing 7A—31 provides, relevant part, '(i)n cause taken discretion, motion party motion, certify Appeals.' '(i)f certified transfer reviews choice left discretion regulated statutory standards. Subsection states: 28 'In causes subject certification subsection section, (1) matter interest, significance jurisprudence (3) appears conflict 29 Appointment governed 7A—450 et seq. These provisions, although face broad enough cover appointments those here,11 generally construed limit Thus followed mandate authorized gone here. 30 facts show respondent, connection received examining preparing behalf Thus, 'once lawyer passed court.' said, therefore, court. many case. materials, se, appear review. 31 fortified conclusion understanding function critical perceive it, 'a correct guilt' see 590 'the State,' below probable even though believes incorrect, Peaseley Virginia Iron, Coal Coke 282 N.C. 194 South Eastern 133 incorrect nevertheless fail satisfy criteria above. Once organized lawyerlike fashion justices able ascertain satisfies established legislature 32 say, course, skilled particularly trained arcane art review, prove litigant employ An handicapped assisting conceivable manner Douglas. And required. existing V 33 Much discussion preceding section much depends numerous factors perceived correctness 34 There source former latter enacted Congress. relied exists consent reviewed. 35 led quite Griffin, indeed so, Government compensate petitioners here judgments Yet policy jurisdictional statements See, e.g., Drumm 373 947, 1683 (1963); Mooney New York, 1678 Oppenheimer 374 819, 1860 authorities, odd, indeed, read impose States, decline so. VI way discourage legislative choice, judicial Some well choose conceivably find funds justice preclude implementation time. prisoners several constitutional Court.12 Our reading leaves choices secured refused 37 contrary Reversed. DOUGLAS, BRENNAN MARSHALL concur, dissenting. 40 affirm am agreement Chief Judge Haynsworth unanimous panel 650. 811, necessity us. did deal later levels courts 'there kind man enjoys 'depends money has." 42 'no differentiation permissive counsel.' F.2d, 653. More familiar functioning we, 'in questions prosecutions, state's highest predictably most receive.' Ibid. constrained diverging earlier developments rendered suspect. '(T)he remains ultimate arbiter citizens.' 43 correctly observed proceeding disadvantage himself allege layman's terms; sophisticated approach demanded:* 44 'An handling appeals, articulate telling story simple language legalisms, technical writs hazards untrained law hardly expected negotiate. 45 "Certiorari constitute highly specialized aspect work. (a court) deems important certainly normal knowledge appellant. Boskey, Right Counsel Appellate Proceedings, Minn.L.Rev. 783, 797 (1961) (footnote omitted)." 46 Furthermore, handled relatively easy apply expertise advise client chance succeeding. 47 grounded equality. defendant. 'same appeals.' 655. 650 (1973). Moffitt, N.C.App. 694, 177 324 (1970) (Mecklenburg); 337, 181 184 (1971) (Guilford). 279 396, 183 247 (1971). 654. remand 'appraise substantiality claim.' examine papers ., remedy prisoner's release corpus,' determine claim 'patently frivolous.' See ex rel. Pennington Pate, 409 757 (CA7 1969); Peters Cox, 575 (CA10 1965). n. 2, 588. rationales, stating: 'If (in Douglas) clause, inequality obvious dissent discourse terms, encompasses elements deprived professional litigants, similarly situated, benefited it. Hudson Water company McCarter, 209 349, 529, 531, 52 828 (1908). Brief 5. (b)(6) 7A—451, '(d)irect decree, including final decrees had.' procedures. 652. Section 7A—451 (Supp.1973) provides: '(a) services actions proceedings: Any fine five hundred dollars ($500.00), more, adjudged; '(2) Chapter General Statutes; '(3) '(4) revocation probation, confinement adjudged hearing; '(5) extradition another sought; '(6) hospitalization 122, Article (Judicial Hospitalization) (Mentally Ill Criminals), Statutes involuntary commitment facility 122 '(7) civil arrest bail 34, '(8) juvenile, institution superior charge possible.' attempting three Court: 7A—31(c) seems third explored draw little Rule guidelines exercise jurisdiction, Court; assert Cf. Magnum Import Coty, 262 159, 163, 532, 67 922. Moreover, greatly aided briefs accuracy, brevity, clarity granted. Furness, Withy Yang-Tsze Insurance Assn., 242 430, 434, 141, 142, 61 409.

Classification Label: 1