State v. Maddox, III, Minn.Ct.App., 1/28/2013. The district court ordered Mr. Maddox, III to pay restitution in the total amount of just over six grand. Mr. Maddox, III challenged the restitution order and appeared for a hearing. He appeared without an attorney; neither the court nor the prosecutor told him that he had a right to counsel so he didn’t waive that right.
And just what right might this be, anyway? It turns out that a restitution hearing is a “critical stage” of the state’s prosecution of a criminal defendant to which an accused’s right to counsel applies. This is because certain legal rights may be lost if not exercised. Critical stages are:
proceedings between an individual and agents of the State . . . whether formal or informal, in court or out, that amount to trial-like confrontations, at which counsel would help the accused in coping with legal problems or meeting his adversary.” Rothgery v. Gillespie Cnty., Tex., 554 U.S. 191 (2008).
The court of appeals has previously held that payment of court-ordered restitution is a part of a criminal “sentence.” State v. Hughes, 742 N.W.2d 460 (Minn.Ct.App. 2007). The question is whether that holding extends to the restitution hearing. The court of appeals says that under the Minnesota Constitution, a restitution hearing is part of a criminal “sentence.” A handful of states agree: Alabama, Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Oregon, Arizona, Kansas, Utah, Washington State,
No comments:
Post a Comment