United States v. Maroney

• Decision Date: 29 April 1964
• Docket Number: Civ. A. No. 64-314.
• Citation: 228 F. Supp. 800
• Parties: UNITED STATES of America ex rel. John SIMON v. James F. MARONEY, Superintendent State Correctional Institution, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania

228 F. Supp. 800

UNITED STATES of America ex rel. John SIMON v. James F. MARONEY, Superintendent State Correctional Institution, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Civ. A. No. 64-314.

United States District Court W. D. Pennsylvania.

April 29, 1964.

Martin Lubow, Pittsburgh, Pa., for petitioner John Simon.

Louis Abromson, Asst. Dist. Atty., of Allegheny County, Pittsburgh, Pa., for James F. Maroney.

GOURLEY, Chief Judge.

In this state habeas corpus proceeding wherein state remedies have been exhausted, petitioner seeks relief on the grounds, inter alia, that when he plead guilty to six felonies in 1942, he was not represented by counsel. In the opinion of the Court, he is entitled to habeas corpus relief.

It is evident that failure to provide counsel for a defendant in a serious criminal action vitiates a conviction whether it be after trial or on a plea of guilty. See Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335, 83 S.Ct. 792, 9 L.Ed.2d 799 (1963); United States ex rel. Craig v. Myers, 3rd Cir., 329 F.2d 856 (applying Gideon retroactively). The Commonwealth, however, contends that petitioner was advised of his rights to counsel, knew of his right to counsel, but did not request counsel and knowingly and intelligently waived his rights to counsel. If the petitioner knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel, the conviction is constitutionally valid. See, e. g., Moore v. Michigan, 355 U.S. 155, 78 S.Ct. 191, 2 L.Ed.2d 167 (1957).

FACTS

Counsel for the petitioner and the District Attorney of Allegheny County entered into a stipulation as to certain facts which are not in dispute. The Court agrees with said counsel that said statements are true and adopts said stipulated facts as its Findings of Fact:

1. At the time of his arrest and sentencing, John Simon was eighteen years of age.

2. At the time of his arrest and sentencing, John Simon had never been in Criminal Court before, though he had had some involvement with the Juvenile Court authorities.

3. John Simon's I. Q., as tested at various times prior to, and subsequent to June 18, 1942, was recorded as 55, 59 and 61. He was a high-grade moron at the time of the sentencing.

4. John Simon, at no stage of the proceedings in 1942, had an attorney.

5. John Simon had spent his entire short school career in a special class for retarded children and was, at the time of the sentencing, illiterate.

DISCUSSION

It is the opinion of the Court that an individual of the age of the petitioner, with his education and intellectual background, did not, and cannot, knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel in a proceeding where he is charged with six felonies.

The record is not especially clear on the issue of whether or not the petitioner was advised of his right to counsel and whether or not the Commonwealth offered to appoint counsel to represent him. Since the transcript of the plea and sentence in 1942 is incomplete, the Commonwealth attempted to rely on the evidence of an Assistant District Attorney as to the practice followed in 1942 in the criminal courts of Allegheny County. Said Assistant District Attorney testified at the...