Williams v. Oklahoma City
Decision Date | 09 June 1969 |
Docket Number | No. 841,841 |
Citation | 23 L.Ed.2d 440,395 U.S. 458,89 S.Ct. 1818 |
Parties | Tommie E. L. WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. OKLAHOMA CITY et al |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Jon F. Gray, Oklahoma City, Okl., for petitioner.
Giles K. Ratcliffe, Oklahoma City, Okl., for respondents.
Petitioner, an indigent, had no funds to pay for a transcript of the trial proceedings in the Municipal Criminal Court of Oklahoma City required to prepare the needed to perfect his appeal to the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals from his conviction for drunken driving and the imposition of a 90-day jail sentence and a $50 fine.* The trial proceedings had been stenographically transcribed pursuant to Oklahoma law, Okla.Stat.Ann., Tit. 11, § 798 (1959), Okla.Stat.Ann., Tit. 20, §§ 110—111 (1962), but the trial court had refused in the absence of statutory authority to order that a copy be provided petitioner at public expense, although finding that petitioner was an indigent whose grounds of appeal were not without meri, and that neither petitioner nor his appointed counsel could make up a transcript of the trial proceedings from memory. The Court of Criminal Appeals, in an original proceeding brought by petitioner, also refused to order that petitioner be provided a copy at public expense. The court agreed with the trial court that no Oklahoma statute or Oklahoma City ordinance authorized such an order, and held further that the Fourteenth Amendment did not mandate 'that an indigent person, convicted for a violation of a city ordinance, quasi criminal in nature and often referred to as a petty offense, is entitled to a case-made or transcript at city expense in order to perfect an appeal from said conviction.' 439 P.2d 965 (1968). We granted certiorari. 393 U.S. 998, 89 S.Ct. 490, 21 L.Ed.2d 463 (1968). We reverse.
Rinaldi v. Yeager, 384 U.S. 305, 310— 311, 86 S.Ct. 1497, 1500, 16 L.Ed.2d 577 (1966). Although the Oklahoma statutes expressly provide that '(a)n appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeals may be taken by the defendant, as a matter of right from any judgment against him * * *,' Okla.Stat.Ann., Tit. 22, § 1051 (Supp.1968) (emphasis added), the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals wholly denies any right of appeal to this impoverished petitioner, but grants that right only to appellants from like convictions able to pay for the preparation of a This is an 'unreasoned distinction' which the Fourteenth Amendment forbids the State to make. See Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12, 76 S.Ct. 585, 100 L.Ed. 891 (1956); Draper v. Washington, 372 U.S. 487, 83 S.Ct. 774, 9 L.Ed.2d 899 (1963); Eskridge v. Washington State Board, 357 U.S. 214, 78 S.Ct. 1061, 2 L.Ed.2d 1269 (1958).
The judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
It is so ordered.
Reversed and remanded.
* The...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Civil Service Commission v. Superior Court
...conviction); Gardner v. California (1968) 393 U.S. 367, 89 S.Ct. 580, 21 L.Ed.2d 601 (habeas corpus); and Williams v. Oklahoma City (1968) 395 U.S. 458, 89 S.Ct. 1818, 23 L.Ed.2d 440 (misdemeanor The interest here as in Ortwein v. Schwab (1972) 410 U.S. 656, 93 S.Ct. 1172, 35 L.Ed.2d 572, "......
-
Kennedy v. Lockyer
...v. California, 393 U.S. 367, 370, 89 S.Ct. 580, 21 L.Ed.2d 601 (1969); and (c) petty offense trials, Williams v. Oklahoma City, 395 U.S. 458, 459, 89 S.Ct. 1818, 23 L.Ed.2d 440 (1969). 7. As we explain later, appeals are different from second or successive trials in that appeals ordinarily ......
-
State v. Waits
...in Gardner [v. California , 393 U.S. 367], 369-70, [89 S. Ct. 580, 21 L. Ed. 2d 601 (1969) ] and Williams [v. Oklahoma City , 395 U.S. 458], 459[, 89 S. Ct. 1818, 23 L. Ed. 2d 440 (1969) ]."). Instead, the appellate rules and our case law contemplate that trial counsel will be involved and ......
-
Boddie v. Connecticut, 27
...to the Constitution.' Roberts v. LaVallee, 389 U.S. 40, 42, 88 S.Ct. 194, 196, 19 L.Ed.2d 41; See also Williams v. Oklahoma City, 395 U.S. 458, 89 S.Ct. 1818, 23 L.Ed.2d 440; Long v. District Court of Iowa, 385 U.S. 192, 87 S.Ct. 362, 17 L.Ed.2d 290; Draper v. Washington, 372 U.S. 487, 83 S......
-
Double helix, double bind: factual innocence and postconviction DNA testing.
...of Chicago, 404 U.S. 189, 195-96 (1971) (holding that the State must provide record for an indigent defendant); Williams v. Oklahoma City, 395 U.S. 458, 458-59 (1969) (per curiam) (holding that a transcript needed to perfect an appeal must be furnished at state expense to an indigent defend......
-
Money matters: judicial market interventions creating subsidies and awarding fees and costs in individual and aggregate litigation.
...Griffin v. Illinois, $51 U.S. 12 (1956) (requiring transcripts on appeal for indigent criminal defendants); Williams v. Oklahoma City, 395 U.S. 458 (1969) (applying subsidized transcript rule to a misdemeanant facing imprisonment); Mayer v. Chicago, 404 U.S. 189 (1971) (requiring the state ......
-
Appendix 1
...client has a federal due process right to a free transcript or an adequate substitute on appeal. [ Williams v. Oklahoma City (1969) 395 U.S. 458.] A Statement on Appeal, if elected, must be filed within 20 days of the notice of election. (Time may be extended by trial court for 15 days for ......