Rothgery v. Gillespie County (554 U.S. 191)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 23, 2008 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 554 U.S. 191 · 128 S. Ct. 2578
- Decided
- June 23, 2008
- Term
- October Term 2007
- Vote
- 8–1
- Majority author
- Justice Souter
- Issue area
- Civil Rights
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Justice Souter delivered the opinion of the Court. This Court has held that the right to counsel guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment applies at the first appearance before a judicial officer at which a defendant is told of the formal accusation against him and restrictions are imposed on his liberty. See Brewer v. Williams, 430 U. S. 387, 398-399 (1977); Michigan v. Jackson, 475 U. S. 625, 629, n. 3 (1986). The question here is whether attachment of the right also requires that a public prosecutor (as distinct from a police officer) be aware of that initial proceeding or involved in its conduct. We hold that it does not. I A Although petitioner Walter Rothgery has never been convicted of a felony, a criminal background check disclosed an erroneous record that he had been, and on July 15, 2002, Texas police officers relied on this record to arrest him as a felon in possession of a firearm. The officers lacked a warrant, and so promptly brought Rothgery before a magistrate, as required by Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann., Art. 14.06(a) (Vernon Supp. 2007). Texas law has no formal label for this initial appearance before a magistrate, see 41 G. Dix & R. Dawson, Texas Practice Series: Criminal Practice and Procedure § 15.01 (2d ed. 2001), which is sometimes called the “article 15.17 hearing,” see, e. g., Kirk v. State, 199 S. W. 3d 467, 476-477 (Tex. App. 2006); it combines the Fourth…
Excerpt of a 40,925-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.