GIDEON v. WAINWRIGHT CITATION: 372 U.S. 335 (1963)
FACTS:
In the state court of Florida, Gideon was accused of breaking and entering. Gideon is so poor that he has no money to hire a lawyer. So he asked the justice to appoint a lawyer for him. But the justice refused him, because according to the laws of the state of Florida, the court only in case the defendant was charged with the death penalty to appoint a lawyer to defend him. Gideon acted as his own lawyer, defending himself against the charge. The jury brought a verdict of guilty and served five years in the state prison.
Gideon believes that the judgment of the first instance court violates the constitutional rights that must be represented by the lawyer. He then applied to the court for habeas corpus at the Supreme Court in Florida, and was denied relief from habeas corpus.
LEGAL ISSUES:
Whether the Sixth Amendment constitutional requirement that indigent defendants be appointed counsel is so fundamental and essential to a fair trial that it is made obligatory on the states by the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution?
COURT DECISION:
The Supreme Court …show more content…
Brady should be overturned and that the sixth amendments must require states to provide criminal defense counsel. Under the leadership of Betts, the United States only needs to provide lawyers for criminal defendants in special circumstances, including death penalty cases. Judge Clark pointed out that the Constitution did not make any distinction between capital and non capital circumstances, but in two cases, the due process of the legal norms required the defendant's procedural safeguards. So should not depend on the defendant was charged with death or non monetary different criminal procedural safeguards. The Constitution guarantees the rights of lawyers as a protection of due process, and in some cases there is no reason to apply for such protection, but there is no other
FACTS:
In the state court of Florida, Gideon was accused of breaking and entering. Gideon is so poor that he has no money to hire a lawyer. So he asked the justice to appoint a lawyer for him. But the justice refused him, because according to the laws of the state of Florida, the court only in case the defendant was charged with the death penalty to appoint a lawyer to defend him. Gideon acted as his own lawyer, defending himself against the charge. The jury brought a verdict of guilty and served five years in the state prison.
Gideon believes that the judgment of the first instance court violates the constitutional rights that must be represented by the lawyer. He then applied to the court for habeas corpus at the Supreme Court in Florida, and was denied relief from habeas corpus.
LEGAL ISSUES:
Whether the Sixth Amendment constitutional requirement that indigent defendants be appointed counsel is so fundamental and essential to a fair trial that it is made obligatory on the states by the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution?
COURT DECISION:
The Supreme Court …show more content…
Brady should be overturned and that the sixth amendments must require states to provide criminal defense counsel. Under the leadership of Betts, the United States only needs to provide lawyers for criminal defendants in special circumstances, including death penalty cases. Judge Clark pointed out that the Constitution did not make any distinction between capital and non capital circumstances, but in two cases, the due process of the legal norms required the defendant's procedural safeguards. So should not depend on the defendant was charged with death or non monetary different criminal procedural safeguards. The Constitution guarantees the rights of lawyers as a protection of due process, and in some cases there is no reason to apply for such protection, but there is no other