Mempa v. Rhay

Supreme Court of the United States · 1967 · Criminal Procedure

389 U.S. 128 (1967)

Updated July 27, 2026

Criminal ProcedureRight to CounselSentencingProbation RevocationSixth Amendmentdeferred sentencingcritical stageappeal rights

Facts

Mempa and Walkling each pleaded guilty in Washington superior court with the assistance of counsel, were placed on probation, and had imposition of sentence deferred. Later, each was brought before the court on allegations that he had violated probation, and at those hearings probation was revoked and sentence imposed. Neither petitioner had counsel at the proceeding in which revocation and sentencing occurred; Mempa was not asked whether he wanted appointed counsel, and Walkling proceeded without his retained lawyer and was not offered appointed counsel. In each case, the sentencing court imposed the maximum term authorized by law after hearing allegations of other criminal conduct.

Issue

Whether the Constitution requires counsel to be provided at a proceeding in which probation is revoked and sentence is then imposed after the original imposition of sentence had been deferred. More specifically, the question was whether this stage is one at which substantial rights may be affected so that the right to counsel attaches.

Rule

Counsel must be afforded to an indigent defendant at every stage of a criminal proceeding where substantial rights may be affected. That requirement includes a Washington proceeding at which probation is revoked and deferred sentence is imposed, whether labeled a revocation of probation or a deferred sentencing.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Oregon, Lucas Moreno pleaded guilty to felony theft with appointed counsel. The court placed him on probation and deferred imposition of sentence; eight months later, at a hearing where the judge revoked probation and imposed a prison term, Lucas appeared alone because no lawyer had been appointed for that hearing.

If Lucas later challenges the proceeding, which is the strongest constitutional argument?

Explanation. The governing rule is that counsel must be afforded to an indigent defendant at every stage of a criminal proceeding where substantial rights may be affected. A combined proceeding in which probation is revoked and a previously deferred sentence is imposed is such a stage. The majority rejected the idea that prior representation at the guilty plea eliminates the need for counsel when sentence is later imposed.