Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

PEOPLE v. HAZEN

PER 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The defendant's probationary sentence was revoked at a hearing during which he was not represented by counsel.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. Mempa v. Rhay (1967), 389 U.S. 128 ( 88 S Ct 254, 19 L Ed 2d 336) requires that the court advise one accused of probation violation of his right to be 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 hearing on the probation violation charge at which the defendant shall be advised of his right to be represented by counsel and, if indigent, to the appointment of assigned counsel.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. HAZEN
(Oct 28, 1969)