Pearl v. State
Wyoming Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
LEHMAN, Chief Justice.
Relying on W.R.Cr.P. 44(a)(2), the district court refused to appoint counsel at appellant’s probation revocation hearing. Because we hold that appointed counsel is constitutionally required under Wyoming’s judicial probation revocation procedure, we reverse.
ISSUE
Appellant, Jason Pearl, presents one issue for review, an issue upon which we requested and received supplemental briefing:
Was the Appellant denied his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process and his Sixth Amendment right to counsel when the trial court failed to appoint counsel to represent the Appellant at…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Gagnon v. ScarpelliSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Mempa v. RhaySupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Black v. RomanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Peters v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2008
- Patrick v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 2005
- Daugherty v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 2002
- Mogard v. City of LaramieWyoming Supreme Court · 2001
- Anderson v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 2002
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.