Stiltner v. Rhay, Penitentiary Superintendent

Opinion summary

Etalia.ai summary of the majority opinion

The case involved petitioner Stiltner, who was convicted of robbery in Washington state and sentenced to life imprisonment under the habitual criminal statute. He filed a habeas corpus petition claiming his constitutional rights were violated because he did not have legal representation during critical stages of his prior convictions, which were used to enhance his sentence as a habitual offender. The Supreme Court held that the absence of counsel at these earlier proceedings rendered those convictions invalid for purposes of enhancing punishment under the habitual criminal statute. This decision reinforced the principle established in Gideon v. Wainwright, ensuring that defendants are entitled to legal representation during all critical stages where their substantial rights might be affected.