Court Opinion

ID: 9735962
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 18:37:57.12047+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:27:03.079920
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion
Hoffman, C.J.
The majority opinion reverses the judgment of the trial court on the sole ground that the defendant was not informed by the trial court that if he was without money, means or credit he was entitled to have counsel represent him at public expense.
The basis for this is the constitutional right to be represented by counsel, and if one is unable to afford to hire an attorney the equal protection clause requires an attorney be provided at public expense.
However, before one is entitled to be informed of his constitutional rights he must have constitutional rights. The law does not require a defendant to be apprised of constitutional rights he does not possess.
If an accused is indigent he is entitled to have counsel at public expense. If an accused is not indigent he is not entitled to counsel at public expense.
Neither the record nor the briefs in the instant case contain any statement that the defendant is indigent, nor are there any words from which such fact may be inferred.
Before a cause can be reversed it is incumbent upon the appellant to show reversible error.
The trial court informed the defendant that he was entitled to be represented by counsel and the cause would be continued to permit him to do so.
The defendant knowingly and willingly chose to proceed without benefit of counsel. The defendant was apprised of his constitutional rights. It is not necessary that the court *616inform a defendant of constitutional rights to which he is not entitled.
The judgment of the trial court should be affirmed.
Note. — Reported in 288 N. E. 2d 576.