Kowalski v. Tesmer
John Tesmer was convicted of a home invasion charge after pleading guilty in Michigan state court. A Michigan statute prohibited the appointment of appellate counsel for defendants who pleaded guilty. Citing that particular statute, the trial judge John F. Kowalski denied Tesmer's request for an appointed appellate counsel. Tesmer, along with two other indigent criminal defendants and two attorneys who routinely represented indigent criminal defendants, filed a complaint stating that the Michigan statute violated the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court had previously recognized a litigant's standing to sue when the litigant suffered an actual injury, bears a close relation to the third party, and the third party in question has limited ability to protect his or her own interests. In this case, the Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine two issues: (1) Does the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee an automatic right to appointed appellate counsel for indigent criminal defendants convicted by a guilty plea? (2) Do attorneys who derive part of their income from representing indigent criminal defendants convicted by a guilty plea have third-party standing to challenge the constitutionality of a state statute which purportedly violates the due process rights of such defendants?
Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties
1. Does the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee a right to an appointed attorney in a discretionary first appeal of an indigent criminal defendant convicted by a guilty plea?
In 1994, Michigan eliminated appeals of right for criminal defendants who plead guilty. See Mich. Const. 1963 art. I, ยง 20. In 1999, after John Tesmer pleaded guilty to the charge of home invasion, Judge John F.