The Supreme Court case of Gideon v. Wainwright is paramount in our right to have legal counsel; this case still affects everyday criminal procedure. Commentator Akhil Reed Amar highlights the fact that this case exemplifies that us as citizens have “the right to rights” and this is provided by being able to have legal counsel available to you even if you cannot afford it (7:30). Clarence Gideon was a 51-year-old white man who had been convicted of multiple felonies. They described him as someone who had been “tossed away by life;” he was not a dangerous individual, moreover someone who could not seem to get on their feet, so he turned to gambling and theft. In 1961, Gideon was arrested and convicted for breaking into and stealing money and
…show more content…
So, in Gideons case, he was not appointed an attorney even though he could not afford one because it was not a capital punishment case. When the case made it to the Florida Supreme Court, they upheld the ruling because of the clear rules in Florida about appointing an attorney to only capital cases. While in jail, Gideon wrote a handwritten letter to the United States Supreme Court claiming that he was convicted in violation of his constitutional rights; all the justices regard this letter as an appeal and decided to take it into their own hands furthermore. Since Gideon was petitioning a writ of habeas corpus against the prison, and Wainwright was the head of the Florida prisons, he was then determined the defendant. In 1963, the justices agreed to hear the case of Gideon v. Wainwright. The justices on the Supreme Court were quite new to the court and this was a first and paramount case for the court. Abe Fortas, Gideon's attorney, did the oral argument in January of 1963, while Gideon was still in jail. In the oral argument, Fortas argued that every individual in every case at a state level, whether rich or poor, has the right to legal
So, in Gideons case, he was not appointed an attorney even though he could not afford one because it was not a capital punishment case. When the case made it to the Florida Supreme Court, they upheld the ruling because of the clear rules in Florida about appointing an attorney to only capital cases. While in jail, Gideon wrote a handwritten letter to the United States Supreme Court claiming that he was convicted in violation of his constitutional rights; all the justices regard this letter as an appeal and decided to take it into their own hands furthermore. Since Gideon was petitioning a writ of habeas corpus against the prison, and Wainwright was the head of the Florida prisons, he was then determined the defendant. In 1963, the justices agreed to hear the case of Gideon v. Wainwright. The justices on the Supreme Court were quite new to the court and this was a first and paramount case for the court. Abe Fortas, Gideon's attorney, did the oral argument in January of 1963, while Gideon was still in jail. In the oral argument, Fortas argued that every individual in every case at a state level, whether rich or poor, has the right to legal