To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library




Mempa v. Rhay

Law Dictionary

Law Dictionary

Featuring Black's Law Dictionary 2nd Ed.
Font size

Criminal Procedure keyed to Saltzburg

Citation. Mempa v. Rhay, 389 U.S. 128, 88 S. Ct. 254, 19 L. Ed. 2d 336, 1967 U.S. LEXIS 267 (U.S. Nov. 13, 1967)

Brief Fact Summary. A joy rider had his probation revoked on the grounds of a previous burglary. He did not have counsel.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. “A lawyer must be afforded at [a] proceeding whether it [is] labeled a revocation of probation or deferred sentencing.”

Facts. Petitioner Mempa pled guilty for “joyriding”. He was sentenced to two years probation on the condition that he spend 30 days in jail and the sentence be deferred. Four months later, the Spokane County prosecutor moved to have the petitioner’s probation revoked on the grounds that he had been involved in a burglary during his probation. At the subsequent hearing, petitioner was unrepresented by counsel. He admitted to the burglary, which was confirmed by his probation officer. The petitioner’s probation was revoked.

Issue. Whether “the right to counsel [extends to] the time of sentencing where the sentencing has been deferred subject to probation.”

Create New Group

Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following