Legal Opinion

People v. Hernandez

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided December 19, 1968No. Docket 5,033PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

September 21, 1967, after a probation violation hearing, defendant’s probation was revoked and he was sentenced to prison. Defendant was not represented by counsel-at the revocation hearing; he was not advised of his right to counsel; nor was it determined whether or not defendant desired counsel. On September 21, 1967, the law did not require that defendant be represented by counsel at a probation violation hearing nor that he be advised of his right to counsel. On the basis of Mempa v. Rhay (1967), 389 US 128 (88 S Ct 254, 19 L Ed 2d 336), defendant appeals and attacks the validity of the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Mempa v. RhaySupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. McConnell v. RhaySupreme Court of the United States · 1968

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. People v. Michael BrownMichigan Court of Appeals · 1976
  2. People v. KitleyMichigan Court of Appeals · 1975
  3. People v. MarshallMichigan Court of Appeals · 1969
  4. People v. MarshallMichigan Court of Appeals · 1969
  5. People v. KitleyMichigan Court of Appeals · 1975

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

Powered by the Exa API