People v. Emmett, 25 N.Y.2d 355 (1969)
A defendant’s right to counsel on appeal includes the right for that counsel to have an opportunity to prepare and submit a brief on the merits of the case.
Summary
The defendant was convicted of issuing a bad check. On appeal to the Appellate Term, the defendant argued insufficient evidence and lack of intelligent waiver of counsel/jury trial. The Appellate Term remitted the case for a hearing on waiver. After a finding of valid waiver and before defense counsel received the hearing minutes, the Appellate Term affirmed the conviction. Counsel’s motion for reargument and leave to file a brief was denied. The New York Court of Appeals reversed, holding that denying counsel the opportunity to submit a brief negates the effective appeal to which a defendant is entitled. The Court emphasized the importance of single-minded advocacy by appellate counsel.
Facts
The defendant was convicted in District Court of issuing a worthless check for $51 and sentenced to 10 days in jail (execution suspended). The defendant was not represented by counsel at trial but had Legal Aid counsel for the appeal.
Procedural History
The District Court found the defendant guilty. On appeal, the Appellate Term remitted the case for a hearing on whether the defendant knowingly waived his rights. The District Court found that he had. The Appellate Term affirmed the conviction before defense counsel received the hearing minutes. The Appellate Term denied the defendant’s motion for reargument and leave to file a brief. The New York Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Term’s affirmance and remitted the case to that court for reargument.
Issue(s)
Whether a defendant is deprived of the right to appeal when the Appellate Term decides against him without allowing his attorney an opportunity to prepare and submit a brief.
Holding
Yes, because implicit in the right to appeal and to have counsel on that appeal is the right for such counsel to be afforded an opportunity to be heard and to submit a brief on the merits of the case.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court reasoned that denying a defendant’s lawyer on appeal any opportunity to see or read the record and present arguments negates the effective appeal to which a defendant is entitled. “Implicit in the right of a defendant to appeal (see People v. Borum, 8 Y 2d 177) and to have counsel on that appeal (see People v. Hughes, 15 Y 2d 172; Douglas v. California, 372 U. S. 353) is his right that such counsel be afforded an opportunity to be heard and to submit a brief on the merits of the case.” The Court also noted that there is no substitute for the single-minded advocacy of appellate counsel, who may advance contentions that judges of busy appellate courts might otherwise miss. An appellate court must afford a defendant’s lawyer the opportunity to present arguments, point out alleged errors, and call attention to asserted questions of law. “There is no substitute for the single-minded advocacy of appellate counsel. Experience has demonstrated that they not infrequently advance contentions which might otherwise escape the attention of judges of busy appellate courts, no matter how conscientiously and carefully those judges read the records before them.”