Reynolds v. Kimmons

(dissenting).

I respectfully dissent.

Nothing in the majority opinion or the authorities cited convinces me that the defendant in a paternity action, even where indigent, is entitled to the appointment of counsel at public expense as a matter of procedural due process. The correct view, I believe, is to the contrary. See State v. Walker, 87 Wash.2d 443, 553 P.2d 1093 (1976); Artibee v. Cheboygan Circuit Judge, 54 Mich.App. 433, 221 N.W.2d 225 (Mich.App.1974), rev’d., 397 Mich. 54, 243 N.W.2d 248 (Mich.1976).

Being also of the opinion that petitioner’s other arguments are without merit, I would…