Summary
The Pennsylvania Superior Court held that the Due Process Clause requires appointment of counsel for indigent defendants in Pennsylvania civil paternity actions. Applying the Mathews v. Eldridge balancing test, the court emphasized the significant familial, liberty, and property interests at stake, the risk of erroneous paternity determinations, and the state's interest in accurate adjudications. The court reversed the denial of appointed counsel and remanded for a paternity hearing with appointed representation.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether an indigent defendant in a civil paternity action in Pennsylvania has a federal due process right to appointed counsel.
- Whether the Mathews v. Eldridge factors require appointment of counsel before an indigent defendant's paternity proceeding.
Holdings
- The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires Pennsylvania to appoint counsel for indigent defendants in civil paternity actions.
- Fundamental fairness requires appointment of counsel before commencement of the paternity proceeding rather than retrospective, case-by-case review of whether counsel could have affected the result.
Key quotations
“In so doing, we are left with the inescapable conclusion that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires the appointment of counsel for indigent defendants in civil paternity actions in Pennsylvania.” (at 193-194)
“Unless the rights of indigent paternity defendants are protected, courts risk finding not the right man, but simply the poorest man to be the father of a child.” (at 191-192)
“Just as the termination of such [parent-child] bonds demands procedural fairness. . . so too does their imposition.” (at 189)
Factual background
Cleoria Corra sought child support from Raymond Coll, Jr., alleging that he was the father of her son. Coll submitted an affidavit of indigency and a defense stating that he intended to deny paternity and needed legal representation. The trial was delayed while the court considered his request for appointment of counsel, which the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas denied.
Procedural history
Cleoria Corra filed a support complaint against Raymond Coll, Jr., alleging that he was the father of her son. Coll, who was indigent and intended to contest paternity, moved for appointment of counsel. The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas en banc denied the motion, and the Superior Court granted interlocutory review by permission.
Remand instructions
Reverse the order denying counsel and remand for a paternity hearing at which Raymond Coll, Jr. is represented by appointed counsel. The lower court must initially determine whether counsel should be provided through the Public Defender's Office or another source. The Superior Court did not retain jurisdiction.