Legal Document

348 U.S. 105 75 Supreme Court Reporter 145 99 L.Ed. 135 O'Neal MASSEY, Petitioner,v.H. E. MOORE, Warden, Texas State Penitentiary at Huntsville, Texas. Number 119. Argued Nov. 8, 1954. Decided Dec. 6, Mr.Dean Acheson, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Mr. James N. Castleberry, Jr., Austin, Tex., respondent pro hac vice by special leave of Court. Justice DOUGLAS delivered the opinion 1 Petitioner, who is in a prison under life sentence imposed court, brought this petition writ habeas corpus Federal District His claim that he was denied due process law guaranteed Fourteenth Amendment because tried and convicted robbery time when unsound mind unassisted counsel. The without hearing. Appeals affirmed divided vote. 205 Reporter, 2nd Series 665. case here on certiorari. 347 1011, 74 873. 2 Petitioner's trial charge started ended same day. He had been confined to psychopathic hospital state several months prior trial; part kept cell block reserved most violent inmates. removed from strait jacket March 7, 1941, 11, 1941. stood benefit counsel, though crime with which charged carried mandatory petitioner suffered two felony convictions. See Vernon's Ann.Tex.Pen.Code, Article 63. 3 Petitioner declined plead guilty; hence plea not guilty entered. So far as we are advised, took no proceedings made attempt conduct any defense. immediately sentenced. Shortly thereafter, commit suicide; then recommitted ward where more. While so confined, appeal his judgment conviction expired. 4 Since conviction, has repeatedly obtain relief way both federal courts. claimed counsel while insane unable defend himself. Until 1952, failed,1 record erroneously stated represented error corrected affidavits judge prosecuting attorney. Thereupon renewed efforts get hearing claim. Finally courts him question whether thus could be raised only appeal, collaterally. Ex parte Massey, 157 Tex.Cr.R. 491, 249 South Western 599. having exhausted remedies, sought present Court, ruled against him. grounds (1) now tenders an issue should have during (2) petitioner's insanity determined 1948 Court; (3) allegations lack do substantial question. 5 We disagree conclude entitled trial. such In 1948, acting erroneous assumption held competent stand 6 merely ruled, 'On whether, since trial, custody violation Constitution, etc. United States, & N Immigration Nationality Decisions examined again all Courts reached conclusion contention accordance Constitution merit.' That may mean evidence support finding lawyer also sufficient sustain lawyer. It view issues same. leaves us doubt. One might sense being incapable standing yet capacity difference those importance make manifest grave injustice done, if earlier were allowed service here. On ability represent himself remains undetermined. 7 pleadings must take true allegation mental incapacity Smith versus O'Grady, 312 329, 61 572, 85 859; White Ragen, 324 760, 763, 65 978, 980, 89 1348. Yet claimed, effectively foreclosed defending cannot hold man requirement tendering If insane, need tender defense too plain argument. convictions accused unskilled, ignorant, or mentally deficient able comprehend legal involved Williams Kaiser, 323 471, 363, 398; Wade Mayo, 334 672, 68 1270, 92 1647; Palmer Ashe, 342 134, 72 191, 96 154. fair Betts Brady, 316 455, 462, 62 1252, 1256, 86 1595. No can unaided reason condition stands helpless alone before court. Even sane layman difficulty discovering particular defenses allows. Gibbs Burke, 337 773, 69 1247, 93 1686. problems difficult impossible insane. Any hopelessly beyond reach contest well complete 8 For reasons, failure raise emphasizes waiver loss constitutional right. Cf. supra. 9 intimate merits, know what facts will produce. rule proven, deprived liberty law. 10 Reversed. chapters, reported, unsuccessful attempts question, see re 327 770, 66 954, 90 1000; 149 172, 191 877; Massey Moore, Cir., 173 980.

Classification Label: 0