DE MEERLEER
v.
MICHIGAN
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Court held that a seventeen-year-old defendant, convicted of murder without legal assistance or advice regarding his rights and the consequences of his plea, was deprived of essential rights under the Federal Constitution.
Petitioner, seventeen years old, was charged with murder, arraigned, tried, and convicted of first-degree murder, and sentenced to life imprisonment o…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Constitutional Rights cases and more on FLexlaw
Per Curiam.
In conformity with Michigan procedure, petitioner moved for leave to file a delayed motion for new trial in the court in which he had been convicted of first-degree murder. Serious impairment of his constitutional rights at the arraignment and trial were asserted as grounds for the motion. The trial court denied the motion, and the Supreme Court of Michigan on appeal affirmed that ruling. 313 Mich. 548, 21 N. W. 2d 849. We granted certi-orari because of the importance of the constitutional issues presented.
The facts are not in dispute.
On May 16, 1932, an information was filed in the Circuit Court of Lenawee County, Michigan, charging petitioner, then seventeen years of age, and one Virgil Scott with the crime of murder. On the same day, petitioner was arraigned, tried, convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment.
The record indicates that petitioner was without legal assistance throughout all these proceedings and was never advised of his right to counsel. The court did not explain the consequences of the plea of guilty, and the record indicates considerable confusion in petitioner’s mind at the time of the arraignment as to the effect of such a plea. No evidence in petitioner’s behalf was introduced at the trial and none of the State’s witnesses were subjected to cross-examination.
After reviewing the foregoing facts, the Supreme Court of Michigan determined that the record revealed no deprivation of petitioner’s constitutional rights. The court indicated that it had given consideration to the case of Hawk v. Olson, 326 U. S. 271 (1945), and the authorities cited therein, but concluded that the rule of the Michigan cases was determinative. See People v. Williams, 225 Mich. 133, 195 N. W. 818 (1923).
In this there was error. Here a seventeen-year-old defendant, confronted by a serious and complicated criminal charge, was hurried through unfamiliar legal proceedings without a word being said in his defense. At no time was assistance of counsel offered or mentioned to him, nor was he apprised of the consequences of his plea. Under the holdings of this Court, petitioner was deprived of rights essential to a fair hearing under the Federal Constitution. Powell v. Alabama, 287 U. S. 45 (1932); Williams v. Kaiser, 323 U. S. 471 (1945); Tomkins v. Missouri, 323 U. S. 485 (1945); White v. Ragen, 324 U. S. 760 (1945); Hawk v. Olson, supra. See Betts v. Brady, 316 U. S. 455 (1942).
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (36 total)
-
Mason v. State, 176 So. 2d 76 (Fla. 1965)…endant to prove that “he did not competently and intelligently waive his constitutional right to assistance of [*79] Counsel.” This burden applies unless the record establishes the point. In De Meerleer v. People of State of Michigan, 329 U.S. 663, 67 S.Ct. 596, 91 L. Ed. 584, one of the elements leading to post-conviction relief-was a finding that “at no time was assistance of counsel offered •or mentioned to * * * the defendant.” In Von Moltke v. Gillies, 332 U.S. 708, 68 S. Ct. 316, 92 L.Ed. 309, the U.…
-
Spriggs v. State, 158 So. 2d 786 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963)…ounsel the court reviewed circumstances of possible mob violence which appeared in accused’s petition together with the severity of the crime and the maximum penalty permitted under the law of Michigan. . De Meerleer v. People of State of Michigan, 329 U.S. 663, 67 S.Ct. 596, 91 L.Ed. [*788] 584 (1947). The Supreme Court stated: “Here a seventeen year old defendant confronted by a serious and complicated criminal charge, was hurried through unfamiliar legal proceeding without a word being said in his defen…
-
Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443 (U.S. 1953)…the highest State courts have failed to recognize violations of these precepts that offend the limitations which the Constitution of the United States places upon enforcement by the States of their criminal law. See, e. g., De Meerleer v. Michigan, 329 U. S. 663, and Marino v. Ragen, 332 U. S. 561. Can it really be denied that in both these cases, which antedated Darr v. Burford, the [*512] United States District Courts sitting in Illinois and Michigan would have been justified in granting the writ of habe…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 36 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Ozie Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (U.S. 1932)
- Betts v. Brady, 316 U.S. 455 (U.S. 1942)
- White v. Ragen, 324 U.S. 760 (U.S. 1945)
- Hawk v. Olson, 326 U.S. 271 (U.S. 1945)
- Williams v. Kaiser, 323 U.S. 471 (U.S. 1945)
- Tomkins v. Missouri, 323 U.S. 485 (U.S. 1945)