Legal Opinion

People v. Hazen

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided October 28, 1969No. Docket No. 6,609PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

The defendant’s probationary sentence was revoked at a hearing during which he was not represented by counsel. The trial judge did not advise him of his right to counsel.

*577Mempa v. Rhay (1967), 389 US 128 (88 S Ct 254, 19 L Ed 2d 336) requires that the court advise one accused of probation violation of his right to he represented by counsel and, if indigent, to the appointment of assigned counsel. People v. Marshall (1969), 16 Mich App 578; cf. People v. Brooks (1969), 16 Mich App 759.

The revocation of the defendant’s probation and sentence to prison is set aside and the cause is remanded for a…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Mempa v. RhaySupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. People v. MarshallMichigan Court of Appeals · 1969
  3. People v. BrooksMichigan Court of Appeals · 1969

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. People v. HazenMichigan Court of Appeals · 1969

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API