Com. v. Harding, J.
Com. v. Harding, J. No. 3214 EDA 2015
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Mar 24, 2017Background
- James Harding pled guilty on March 17, 2014 to three separate DUI counts and received consecutive negotiated sentences of 30 days to 6 months on each docket.
- After committing new offenses, the court revoked Harding’s parole on March 10, 2015 at a Gagnon II hearing, ordered him to serve the balance of the original sentence, and immediately reparoled him.
- Harding later committed forgery and received an 11.5 to 23‑month sentence; on September 22, 2015 the court conducted another Gagnon II hearing.
- At the September 22 hearing the court asked Harding whether he wanted representation; Harding responded that he did not and wanted to "get this over and done with." No further colloquy about waiver occurred.
- The court revoked parole, ordered service of the remaining balance of the prior sentence, and granted immediate work release; Harding timely appealed pro se.
- The Superior Court found the record insufficient to show a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of counsel and vacated the judgment of sentence, remanding for a Grazier hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Harding knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived the right to counsel at the parole revocation (Gagnon II) hearing | Harding (appellant) effectively waived counsel by stating he did not want representation and wished to proceed immediately | Trial court relied on Harding's brief statement to proceed without conducting a fuller on‑the‑record waiver colloquy | The Superior Court held the record did not show a valid waiver; remanded for a Grazier hearing to determine whether waiver was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary |
Key Cases Cited
- Robinson, 970 A.2d 455 (Pa. Super. 2009) (on‑the‑record determination required when waiver of counsel is sought at appellate stages)
- Grazier, 713 A.2d 81 (Pa. 1998) (procedure for determining waiver of counsel on the record)
- Jester, 595 A.2d 748 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1991) (no absolute right to counsel at parole revocation hearings but courts must take reasonable steps to allow parolee to obtain counsel)
- Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778 (U.S. 1973) (due process framework for parole and probation revocation hearings)
- Bronson v. Pennsylvania Bd. of Probation and Parole, 421 A.2d 1021 (Pa. 1980) (recognizing right to counsel on appeal from parole revocation)