Summary of the Case
In Gideon v. Wainwright case, the United States Supreme Court ruled that all the courts should provide lawyers to people charged with criminal activities. The United States Supreme Court announced that a person accused of a crime and cannot afford to pay for lawyers to represent them has the right to an attorney. This CaseCase came from Florida Supreme Court and led to a revolution in criminal laws in the United States. The issue is about Clarence Gideon, who was charged with theft and stealing in a pool hall in Florida. Florida Supreme Court found the man guilty and sentenced him to 5 years in prison. However, after appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court, the Court overturned this ruling.
Case Outline
Title: This CaseCase is called The Gideon v. Wainwright 372 U.S. 335 (1963).
History of the Case
This CaseCase began in 1961 when Gideon was arrested and charged with breaking and stealing money from a pool hall in Panama City. On the day of his hearing, Gideon did not have a lawyer to represent him; he requested the government, through the judge to appoint him one of the lawyers as he could not pay one for himself (Israel, 1963). The judge, however, did not grant him this request because, according to laws at that time, the courts only appointed lawyers for people charged with capital offenses. Therefore, Gideon was forced to represent himself before the judge and prove himself innocent of the charges against him. Gideon made statements that argued he was innocent of the charges against him. However, the Court found him guilty and sentenced him to 5 years imprisonment despite all these efforts.
The fact of the Case
During his time in prison, Gideon wrote a petition to the Court in Florida requesting release as his detention was unconstitutional. In this petition, Gideon argued his constitutional right to have a lawyer represent him during his trials. However, the Florida Supreme Court denied this request. According to the Court, Gideon had no right to a lawyer appointed by the Court at the government’s expense (Israel, 1963). Gideon did not stop at this as he filed another petition to the U.S. Supreme Court on this same CaseCase. He told the Court in writing that the state court in Florida had refused to give him a lawyer during his trial, violating his constitutional rights (Krash, 1963). The U.S. Supreme Court heeded the hearing of this case and analyzed all defendants’ rights in Court according to the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution. Luckily, the Court listened to his plea and overturned the ruling by the Florida state court.
Legal Questions
The legal question that the U.S. Supreme Court had to ask was whether it was just for the state court to deny the defendant the right to a lawyer at trial. The Supreme Court also had the question of what group of people receive state-sponsored counsel if they lack money to pay for the services.
Decision or Holdings
The ruling of the Supreme Court argued that all courts must give the defendant lawyers if the defendants were not able to pay for the services.
Verdict and Opinion (Judgement)
On January 15, 1963, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the ruling on Gideon. The judges unanimously agreed that Gideon’s judgment by the state court was unconstitutional as he was denied the right to a lawyer during the trial (Krash, 1963). The lawyer who represented Gideon in this CaseCase, Abe Fortas, argued that Gideon was a man who had an eighth-grade education and needed a lawyer to represent him in his CaseCase at the state court.
Conclusion
Gideon v. Wainwright case expanded the rights of criminal defendants and opportunities for other defendants’ rights (Israel, 1963). This includes the right to counsel, the right to remain silent when arrested, and the right to information about these additional rights. The constitution’s Sixth Amendment allows all defendants the right to lawyers during trials if they cannot afford the lawyers themselves. It states that the accused shall enjoy the right to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense in all criminal prosecutions.
References
Israel, J. H. (1963). Gideon v. Wainwright: The” Art” of overruling. The Supreme Court Review, 211-272. Web.
Krash, A. (1963). Right to a lawyer: The implications of Gideon v. Wainwright. Notre Dame Law, 39(2), 150-160. Web.