## Facts

- Jerry Douglas Mempa pleaded guilty to joyriding in Washington superior court with appointed counsel.
- The court deferred imposition of sentence and placed Mempa on probation, with 30 days in jail.
- After the State alleged Mempa committed a new burglary, the court held a proceeding at which probation was revoked and sentence for the original conviction was imposed.
- Mempa had no counsel at that proceeding, was not asked whether he wanted counsel, and made an admission after questioning by the court.
- A probation officer provided adverse information without cross-examination; the court revoked probation and imposed the maximum 10-year sentence.
- In a consolidated case, Walkling pleaded guilty to second-degree burglary with retained counsel; sentence was deferred and he was placed on probation.
- After Walkling was accused of new offenses, the court proceeded to revoke probation and impose the maximum 15-year sentence without counsel, despite his statement that retained counsel was expected to appear and without offering to appoint counsel.
- The Washington Supreme Court denied habeas relief to both petitioners.
- The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari and consolidated the cases to decide the scope of the right to counsel when sentencing is deferred subject to probation.

## Issues

1. Whether the Sixth Amendment, applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, requires counsel for an indigent felony defendant at a post-trial proceeding that revokes probation and imposes a previously deferred sentence.
2. Whether a state may deny counsel by characterizing the proceeding as “probation revocation” rather than “sentencing.”

## Decision

- The Supreme Court unanimously reversed the denials of habeas relief.
- The Court held that the Sixth Amendment requires that counsel be provided at a proceeding combining probation revocation with imposition of a deferred sentence.
- The Court treated the combined hearing as a sentencing event for right-to-counsel purposes and rejected distinctions based on procedural labels.

## Legal Principles

- The Sixth Amendment right to counsel applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Counsel must be provided at every “critical stage” of a criminal prosecution where substantial rights of the accused may be affected.
- A hearing that revokes probation and imposes a previously deferred sentence is a critical stage because the court is imposing final sentence and rights may be lost if not asserted then (including potential challenges related to a prior guilty plea and preservation of appellate rights).
- The constitutional requirement does not turn on whether the proceeding is labeled probation revocation or sentencing; it turns on the proceeding’s effect on the defendant’s liberty and legal rights.

## Conclusion

The Court held that when a state defers sentencing subject to probation and later conducts a proceeding that both revokes probation and imposes sentence, the Sixth Amendment requires the assistance of counsel at that proceeding.


Mempa v. Rhay, 389 U.S. 128 (1967)