Hunter v. State, A-12177
| Decision Date | 27 September 1955 |
| Docket Number | No. A-12177,A-12177 |
| Citation | 288 P.2d 425 |
| Parties | Alfred HUNTER, Plaintiff in Error, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Defendant in Error. |
| Court | United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. In every criminal case whether misdemeanor or felony the accused is entitled to the assistance of counsel in his defense and where the accused desires the assistance of counsel and is unable to employ counsel, it is the duty of the court to assign counsel to represent him even though the charge filed against the accused is only a misdemeanor.
2. Where the accused appeared without counsel it was erroneous for the trial court to advise the jury that it was unnecessary for the court to appoint counsel in a a misdemeanor case.
3. An accused may waive his right to the assistance of counsel where he fully understands the nature and consequences of his waiver of such right.
4. In the trial of a case where the accused appears without counsel, the trial court should be diligent to see that no incompetent and hearsay evidence is admitted.
5. Where the record discloses that the accused, a fullblood restricted Indian, appeared without counsel and no counsel was appointed to represent him and it further appeared that the assistant county attorney and highway patrolman were permitted to make statements to the jury during the trial of the case which were highly improper and prejudicial, the cause will be reversed and remanded for a new trial because the conviction was sustained contrary to the constitutional provision that right and justice shall be administered without sale, denial, delay or prejudice. Article 2, Section 6, Oklahoma Constitution.
Appeal from the county court of Caddo County; Dewey E. Hodges, Judge.
Alfred Hunter was convicted in the County Court of Caddo County for the crime of driving an automobile on the public highway while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, and was sentenced to pay a fine of $125. Reversed and remanded for a new trial.
McFadyen & Pugh, Anadarko, for plaintiff in error.
Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., Lewis A. Wallace, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.
The defendant, Alfred Hunter, was charged by an information filed in the County Court of Caddo County with driving an automobile on the public highway while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, was tried, found guilty by verdict of the jury who left the punishment to be fixed by the court. Thereafter the defendant was sentenced to pay a fine of $125 and has appealed.
The defendant was a fullblood restricted Indian who did not have any attorney to represent him at the trial. On appeal many assignments of error are presented, most of them principally directed at instructions which we have heretofore condemned in the cases of Shaffer v. State, Okl.Cr., 283 P.2d 578 and Brookshire v. State, Okl.Cr., 284 P.2d 752. In the instant case since the accused represented himself and was apparently unfamiliar with court procedure, no exceptions were saved to the instructions which were given.
We are principally concerned with the proposition that the accused was denied a fair trial. Two highway patrolmen arrested the accused near Anadarko and each of them testified that in his opinion the accused was under the influence of intoxicating liquor. The defendant testified in his own behalf and admitted drinking three bottles of beer, but said that he was not under the influence of intoxicating liquor. After the assistant county attorney had asked several questions of the patrolman, Mike Hellwege, he then made this statement as shown by the record:
'Juryman, Mr. Patton: Is the Court supposed to appoint a lawyer for him?
'Juryman, Mr. Moss: My question is the charge the man has against him is driving under the influence, isn't it?
'Mr. Hanger: Yes.
* * *
* * *
'Mr. Hanger: Mr. Moss, you stated about intoxication, now you understand that the man down in the gutter drunk driving is different than a man driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, that if a man has had a couple of drinks and his stomach is upset that he could become violent, but not drunk but still...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Young
...Ohio Constitution providing for counsel to appear “in any trial, in any court” includes misdemeanor prosecutions); Hunter v. State, 288 P.2d 425, 428 (Okla.Crim.App.1955) (noting the “all criminal prosecutions” language under the Oklahoma Constitution and finding that “[n]o distinction is d......
-
People v. Mallory
...if they were unable to procure same, the conviction was reversed on that account for violation of 'fundamental rights'. Hunter v. State of Oklahoma, Okl.Cr., 288 P.2d 425. Defendant was convicted of drunk driving, a misdemeanor, and fined $125. The court held that defendant had a right to a......
-
James v. Headley
...Witenski, 1965, 15 N.Y.2d 392, 259 N.Y.S.2d 413, 207 N.E. 2d 358; Bolkovac v. State, 1951, 229 Ind. 294, 98 N.E.2d 250; Hunter v. Oklahoma, Okla.Cr., 1955, 288 P.2d 425; City of Toledo v. Frazier, 1967, 10 Ohio App.2d 51, 226 N.E.2d 777; State ex rel. Barth v. Burke, 1964, 24 Wis.2d 82, 128......
-
Wright v. Denato
...250; People v. Mallory, 378 Mich. 538, 147 N.W.2d 66; People v. Witenski, 15 N.Y.2d 392, 259 N.Y.S.2d 413, 207 N.E.,2d 358; Hunter v. State, Okl.Cr.App., 288 P.2d 425; In re Johnson, 62 Cal.2d 325, 42 Cal.Rptr. 228, 398 P.2d 420; Goslin v. Thomas, 5 Cir., 400 F.2d 594; Wilson v. Blabon, 9 C......