Appeal from order of Superior Court, Oct. T., 1970, No. 73, affirming order of Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County, Dec. T., 1960, No. 131, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Michael Howard Goodman.
Theodore S. Danforth, Public Defender, for appellant.
Henry J. Rutherford, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
Jones, C. J., Eagen, O'Brien, Roberts, Pomeroy, Nix and Manderino, JJ. Dissenting Opinion by Mr. Justice Roberts. Mr. Justice Nix and Mr. Justice Manderino join in this dissenting opinion.
The petition for the allowance of appeal having been improvidently granted, the within appeal is dismissed.
Dissenting Opinion by Mr. Justice Roberts:
The record below establishes that appellant was eighteen years old at the time of his arrest on January 6, 1961. From the time of his arrest until January 20, 1961, petitioner was in continuous police custody. On January 20, petitioner was brought into court, and without counsel, signed a plea of guilty to the indictments for burglary and larceny. On February 1, 1961, petitioner's parents were able to obtain an attorney to represent their son, and the attorney conferred with petitioner on that date. On February 3, 1961, petitioner appeared in court with his attorney and was sentenced. The court records indicate that petitioner entered another guilty plea at this time. At the time of petitioner's arraignment and sentencing, it was not the custom of the Lancaster courts to make stenographic records of such proceedings, so none exists.
Petitioner's claim falls squarely within our decision in Commonwealth ex rel. Mullins v. Maroney, 428 Pa. 195, 236 A.2d 781 (1968). There we held, in an opinion written by Mr. Justice Eagen, that: "There can be no doubt that under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which is applicable to criminal proceedings in the state courts, Mullins was entitled to the assistance of counsel, both at the time of plea and at the time he was sentenced, since each occasion was a 'critical stage' in the criminal prosecution proceedings. . . . The above constitutional requirements are retroactive and mandatory in all instances, ...