State ex rel. White v. Hilgemann, 27548.

• Decision Date: 27 May 1941
• Docket Number: No. 27548.,27548.
• Parties: STATE ex rel. WHITE v. HILGEMANN, Judge.
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

218 Ind. 572
34 N.E.2d 129

STATE ex rel. WHITE
v.
HILGEMANN, Judge.

No. 27548.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

May 27, 1941.

Original action by the state on the relation of Clyde White against Harry H. Hilgemann, regular judge of Allen Circuit Court to compel the respondent to appoint counsel for relator.

Judgment for relator.

[34 N.E.2d 130]

Clyde White, per se.

George N. Beamer, Atty. Gen., and Norman E. Duke, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellee.

FANSLER, Chief Justice.

The relator was convicted of murder in the first degree and sentenced to life imprisonment in the Allen Circuit Court. He was represented at the trial by an attorney of his own choosing, and whom, it is presumed, he had means to pay for the service rendered. A motion for a new trial was overruled. The defendant desires to appeal to this court, assigning error in the trial. The attorney who had represented him declined to undertake the preparation of the record and to prosecute the appeal upon the ground that, because of lack of training and experience in appellate procedure, he believed himself incapable. At this point it was made to appear to the satisfaction of the court that the defendant was a poor person without means with which to procure a competent attorney or proceed with his defense. The learned trial judge indicated his willingness to order the preparation of a bill of exceptions and a transcript of the record, but, unable to find authority for the appointment of counsel to perfect the appeal at the expense of the county, declined the appointment of counsel. This proceeding seeks an order mandating the trial court to appoint counsel for the relator to perfect and present an appeal from the judgment against him to this court.

That the relator is a poor person without means of employing counsel is not questioned, and his right to have counsel previous to and at the trial is not questioned. The records of this court will disclose many cases in which counsel appointed to defend before the beginning of the trial has continued serving to perfect and present an appeal, and that would have been the case here, no doubt, except for counsel's lack of confidence in his adequacy.

We have held that attorneys appointed by the court to defend poor persons in criminal actions cannot be required to serve without compensation; that the Constitution requires that such persons shall have counsel; and that courts have inherent power to incur the expense and order compensation for counsel paid out of county funds. Knox County Council v. State ex rel. McCormick, Ind.Sup., 1940, 29 N.E.2d 405...