## Facts

- Gerald Scarpelli pleaded guilty in Wisconsin to armed robbery, received a 15-year sentence, and had the sentence suspended with seven years’ probation.
- Under an interstate arrangement, Scarpelli lived in Illinois under Cook County probation supervision.
- Illinois police apprehended Scarpelli during an alleged burglary; after receiving warnings, he gave a statement admitting involvement but later claimed it was coerced and false.
- Wisconsin authorities revoked Scarpelli’s probation without appointing counsel and without a revocation hearing, and he was incarcerated.
- After about three years, Scarpelli sought federal habeas relief, asserting due process violations from revocation without a hearing and without counsel.
- The federal district court granted relief; the Seventh Circuit affirmed; the Supreme Court reviewed whether due process requires revocation hearings and appointed counsel.

## Issues

1. Whether due process requires preliminary and final hearings before revoking a previously sentenced probationer’s probation.
2. Whether due process requires appointment of counsel for an indigent probationer (or parolee) in all revocation proceedings.

## Decision

- The Court held that due process requires preliminary and final probation revocation hearings under the same basic conditions applicable to parole revocations.
- The Court rejected a categorical constitutional right to appointed counsel in all revocation proceedings.
- The Court required the hearing authority to decide, case-by-case, whether due process requires appointed counsel for an indigent probationer or parolee.
- The Court directed that when a request for counsel is denied, the grounds for refusal must be stated succinctly in the record.
- The Court affirmed the ruling that revocation without a hearing violated due process, reversed the blanket counsel requirement, and remanded for proceedings consistent with its standard.

## Legal Principles

- A probationer’s conditional liberty interest cannot be terminated without due process protections, including a preliminary hearing and a final revocation hearing.
- Revocation hearings are not criminal prosecutions; procedural requirements are tailored to the conditional-liberty context rather than full trial rights.
- Appointment of counsel is not automatic; it depends on whether fundamental fairness requires counsel in the particular case.
- Counsel should be provided when the probationer, after being informed of the possibility, requests counsel and makes a timely, colorable claim of innocence, or presents substantial justification or mitigation that is complex or otherwise difficult to develop and present without assistance.
- If counsel is denied after a request, the decisionmaker must place the reasons for denial in the record to permit review.

## Conclusion

The Court required structured due process hearings for probation revocations and established a discretionary, case-specific right to appointed counsel, with an on-the-record explanation when counsel is refused.


Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778 (1973)