Court Opinion

ID: 9573922
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:00:26.921325+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:43:40.094521
License: Public Domain

N. J. Kaufman, J.
(concurring). I concur. The facts as outlined by the Honorable Glenn S. Allen do not need repeating. They speak for themselves. At the hearing for violation of probation, as stated in Judge Allen’s opinion, the court said:
" * * * I advise you that you are entitled to a hearing on this matter and, just as you were when you were first before the Court, we appointed an attorney at substantial expense to the county, to represent you. If you want a hearing and if you are without funds with which to employ an attorney, we will appoint one for you.
"On the other hand, if you want an attorney and you have or can obtain the funds for an attorney, we will give you an opportunity for a hearing at a later date.
"Do you wish an attorney in connection with this matter of violation of probation?”
The defendant responded, "I don’t know. The judge in this other county — ". At that time the judge should have gone into the question of indigency and if defendant was indigent, an attorney should have been appointed.