State v. Haste

Decision Date02 March 1993
Docket Number91-2851-CR,Nos. 91-2036-C,s. 91-2036-C
Citation175 Wis.2d 1,500 N.W.2d 678
PartiesSTATE of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Vernon June HASTE, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtWisconsin Court of Appeals

Lew A. Wasserman, of Law Offices of Lew A. Wasserman, Milwaukee, for defendant-appellant.

James E. Doyle, Atty. Gen., with Daniel J. O'Brien, Asst. Atty. Gen., for plaintiff-respondent.

Before WEDEMEYER, P.J., and FINE and SCHUDSON, JJ.

SCHUDSON, Judge.

Vernon Haste appeals his convictions for battery to a peace officer and resisting an officer. Haste argues that he was denied his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel at the trial and his Sixth Amendment right to counsel at the sentencing. Because we conclude that Haste did not waive counsel, but was denied counsel throughout his trial and sentencing, we conclude that Haste was denied his due process right of representation. 1 Therefore, we reverse.

I. Background
A. Preliminary Proceedings

On November 29, 1989, Vernon Haste was tried before a jury on charges of battery to a peace officer and resisting an officer. As the following excerpts from the trial transcript indicate, Haste's representation became problematic as soon as the clerk called his case.

MS. HOFFMAN: Gail Hoffman appears on behalf of the state.

MS. RUFFALO: Sandy Ruffalo appearing on behalf of Vernon Haste who is in custody, Your Honor. Mr. Haste has informed me that he wishes to represent himself.

THE COURT: Mr. Haste is now before the court....

....

It is my understanding that Mr. Haste and his attorney have some concerns about the manner in which this case is going to be presented to the jury. Mr. Haste, you have an attorney, Sandra Ruffalo. She is the attorney of record in this case. It appears that this is the [third] attorney that you have had.

....

And you have run out of string on it as far as attorneys are concerned. What is your position right now with respect to proceeding to trial?

[HASTE]: I'm gonna proceed in a pro se motion, plus I have never seen this individual before but one time. None of the attorneys I have had even considered of investigating this case nor has she even talked to me regarding this case or anything. I have not--discovery papers and all the police records was taken from me in the county jail about four months ago. I have not been able to file anything to this court because I have not received those papers back, so at this time I'm gonna proceed in pro se. I'd like a date set for motions to be heard in this courtroom as soon as I receive those discovery papers....

THE COURT: Mr. Haste, we are going to proceed to a jury trial today, and if you wish to have an attorney, you can have Ms. Ruffalo with you. If you wish to appear pro se, I must go through a certain procedure with respect to allowing you to appear pro se. It is a constitutional matter that has to be dealt with. You are 34 years of age?

[HASTE]: I am going to proceed, Your Honor. At this time I am not prepared to proceed today because I do not have all the information to proceed today that I need.

THE COURT: We are proceeding today, Mr. Haste, so be prepared to answer the questions I address to you.

[HASTE]: I'm sorry, Your Honor, I cannot proceed today unless I get all my papers. Take me back.

THE COURT: You are not going anywhere, Mr. Haste. If you think you can prolong--

[HASTE]: I'm not trying to prolong. I'm just trying to get some fairness here. That's what I'm trying to do....

THE COURT: Well, Mr. Haste, you're--the burdens that bear upon [you] are really fantastic.... [Y]ou have had difficulty with your three attorneys.... Mr. Haste, we are going to proceed with this case. We are drawing a jury, and I am going to direct--

[HASTE]: I cannot proceed with this case today, and if you proceed with the case, I feel it's a violation of constitutional right. I am not prepared. I don't have any papers. No one has talked to me about this case. Ms. Ruffalo have not talked to me. I haven't seen her since the last time when she come down here. We haven't even discussed this case, so how can we proceed in any manner whatsoever? How can we proceed?

THE COURT: Because you are going to be seated either at the chair over there and participate in the trial or you can go back into the tank and remain there during the course of the trial, and at any time that you want to participate in it in an active sort of way, you will be given leave to do so providing you will comply with the requirements of decorum that the court must follow in order to present a fair trial. You can make your choice. Ms. Ruffalo is going to stand by, and if you need any--

[HASTE]: I ask Miss Ruffalo to dismiss herself at this time. She is not my attorney on this case. I have never seen this woman before. I don't even know her.

She don't even know me. She doesn't know anything about this case. I'm stating that I need time to go over my papers, then I'll be prepared to follow through with this.

THE COURT: Bring the jury in.

[HASTE]: I'm sorry. I ask that she do not proceed with this.

THE COURT: Just a minute, before he is excused.

THE BAILIFF: Mr. Haste, the judge is talking to you.

....

THE COURT: Ms. Ruffalo, do you wish ... to make any rejoinder regarding the professional services that either you or your predecessors have performed in this case?

MS. RUFFALO: Your Honor, I have reviewed a very lengthy file that my predecessors have done. I have spoken to the attorneys who have represented him in the past. I have spoken to Mr. Haste. It is correct that I did not see him. I thought he was being brought down to the jail last night, and I did come over at 8 o'clock to see him and was told that he would be here this morning. This is not the type of case that required a lot of conversation with Mr. Haste. I have spoken to him I believe once or twice on the phone since I was last before this court, but--

[HASTE]: Asked you bring my legal papers to me.

MS. RUFFALO: Your Honor, he did make a request that I deliver a file which had been delivered to me by a previous attorney. I have made two attempts to do that. The Sheriff's Department will not take the file because the file contains in it things other than legal papers, and they would not go through it piece of paper by piece of paper....

THE COURT: [U]nder these circumstances, we will not draw the jury until 1:30 this afternoon because if Mr. Haste wants to have further second thoughts about how he wishes to proceed, I'll give him the opportunity to do so. We are not going to act in haste with Mr. Haste. We will proceed with due deliberation insuring that he will have every right that he is entitled to under law and under constitution.

[HASTE]: I don't receive my rights because I don't have an attorney. She is not--

THE COURT: We will try the case this afternoon at 1:30.

You may make yourself available to him when he is taken back into custody. If he chooses not to talk to you, that doesn't relieve you of being here at 1:30.

MS. RUFFALO: Your Honor, I will be here at 1:30. I would like permission to give to the bailiffs that portion of his file which appears to be legal papers so they can give that to him, and I'll take the other parts out.

THE COURT: Very well.

[HASTE]: And I request that this trial do not proceed today.

THE COURT: We will proceed today at 1:30.

[HASTE]: I'm asking that it do not till I get some legal counsel here.

(Emphasis added

The case was recalled that afternoon. Immediately after the clerk recalled the case and the prosecutor stated her appearance, the court proceeded.

THE COURT: The defendant is in the bullpen area, and he will be brought out shortly. Do we have a jury? Are they in the hall or? ... You may be seated over here, Mr. Haste.

[HASTE]: I don't have an attorney. I do not--this is not my attorney. I have not talked to this woman before and I continue to state I have never seen this woman before. I have not talked to this woman before and I ask for a postponement again.

THE COURT: There will be no further postponements in this case. It will proceed. This has been pending since February of this year. This is ... nine months later, and we will proceed. This is the third attorney that has been appointed. Mr. Haste, you have some options. If you wish to be seated in the courtroom and participate in the proceedings which you have an absolute right to do, you may do so. Your attorney--

[HASTE]: That's not my attorney.

THE COURT: Is Miss Sandra Ruffalo?

[HASTE]: No, she's not.

THE COURT: If you do not want to use her services, that is your affair. We will proceed. In the event--

[HASTE]: This is not my attorney. I didn't ask for them to put her on no case at all.

THE COURT: You have repeated that five to ten times, Mr. Haste.

[HASTE]: I ask this not proceed in violation of right to due process, and if she goes head on with this, I state that I will go against you by the board or something. Someone will be getting in contact with you if you proceed illegally on these.

THE COURT: Mr. Haste, threats to your attorney or threats to anybody else--

[HASTE]: Your Honor, Mr. Landry, I am not making any threats. I am not threatening to do anything. All I'm saying I ask you not proceed because I just received my papers, and I feel I am going to file other motions, and I'm looking for a different type of counsel. I did not ask for her. I have not seen this woman since I was on that first day in court and I told her then--

THE COURT: Mr. Haste, you can either sit at the table or you can go back in the bullpen area. A speaker will be made available so that you can hear what the proceedings are.

[HASTE]: I would like to confront my accused, and at this time--

THE COURT: You have an opportunity to confront your accusers.

[HASTE]: This is not my attorney, and I ask for a postponement ... to seek proper counsel and present certain motions.

THE COURT: You can file...

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 cases
  • State v. Cummings
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Supreme Court
    • April 1, 1996
    ...knowingly waived his or her right to counsel. See Pickens v. State, 96 Wis.2d 549, 568-69, 292 N.W.2d 601 (1980); State v. Haste, 175 Wis.2d 1, 22, 500 N.W.2d 678 (Ct.App.1993). In Pickens we declared that because of the importance of a defendant's right to counsel, "nonwaiver is presumed a......
  • State v. Johnson
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Court of Appeals
    • April 27, 1994
    ...right to self-representation raises an issue of constitutional fact which we review independently. State v. Haste, 175 Wis.2d 1, 23, 500 N.W.2d 678, 687 (Ct.App.1993). We agree with the trial court that the record does not support Johnson's contention that the court failed to honor his righ......
  • State v. Reimann, 94-2528-CR
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Court of Appeals
    • October 17, 1996
    ...has been denied a constitutional right is a question of constitutional fact which we review independently. State v. Haste, 175 Wis.2d 1, 23, 500 N.W.2d 678, 687 (Ct.App.1993). Under the Fourteenth Amendment, due process is violated where the prosecution suppresses material evidence favorabl......
  • State v. Oswald
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Court of Appeals
    • December 8, 1999
    ...is identical under state and federal constitutions). This right, however, is not absolute. See State v. Haste, 175 Wis. 2d 1, 22, 500 N.W.2d 678, 686 (Ct. App. 1993). Before allowing a defendant to waive the right to counsel and proceed pro se, the trial court must ensure that the defendant......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT