ipl-logo

Gideon Vs Wainwright Case Analysis

920 Words4 Pages

“I’m taking this all the way to the Supreme Court!” In the United States if a defendant feels as though they did not receive a fair trial the court system allows the offended to appeal to a higher court. Likewise, if the next court’s decision is unsatisfactory the defendant can continue to appeal to higher courts until they reach the Supreme Court, the highest court in the land. However, the Supreme Court is a vastly different courtroom than a trial court. The case of Gideon v. Wainwright highlights the differences between the Supreme Court and Trial Courts. Trial or District courts deal with the actual trying of the case. Gideon v. Wainwright begins with a poor man named Clarence Earl Gideon, accused of breaking and entering a poolroom in …show more content…

illiteracy, mental illness etc. These circumstances, outlined in an earlier supreme court case Betts v. Brady, stated the state was not required to appoint counsel to the defendant. Unless there were special circumstances or it is a capital offense. Fortunately for Gideon after he appealed to the Supreme Court through a Writ of Habeas Corpus with a petition for Certiorari, a higher court reviews the decision of a lower one. This ruling overturned and today all defendants are granted counsel in all cases except for minor offenses, such as traffic tickets. Afterward, the court granted Gideon a new trial as a result of its …show more content…

Lawyers presenting their arguments face the nine Justices are given a limited amount of time to present, however, justices may interrupt with questions. Abe Fortas, selected to represent Gideon, masterfully answered the justices questions while presenting the important points of his case. After the oral presentation, the justices confer in private discussion and select a judge to write the opinion of the court. For Gideon v. Wainwright Justice Black wrote the opinion and presented the court’s decision to overrule Betts v. Brady, a case he’d dissented on twenty years earlier. As aforementioned, the Supreme court’s decision to overrule Betts v. Brady resulted in a new trial for Gideon. The Supreme Court made a wise choice in overruling the Betts v. Brady decision, on account of it being too vague, would create more expensive problems in the future and a fair trial cannot be held if a defendant lacks counsel. The Betts v Brady over the years gain the special circumstances factors including youth, illiteracy, ignorance, mental illness, complex charges or judge and prosecutor behavior at the trial. This left the limitations open to interpretation by the state, this decision to leave flexibility appears to attempt to preserve state power on the issue. However, 25 states sent amici curiae briefs in support of Gideon’s right to counsel

Show More
Related
116 Words | 1 Pages

Prior to the case of Gideon v. Wainwright, defendant Clarence Earl Gideon was charged with breaking and entering in the state of Florida. This crime is a felony according to Florida state law. Unable to pay for defense counsel, Gideon requested that the court grant him one for free. The court denied Gideon his request of being granted defense counsel. The court stated, “Under the laws of the State of Florida, the only time the Court can appoint Counsel to represent a Defendant is when that person charged with a capital offense.”

Read More
710 Words | 3 Pages

Rosenberg first gives rough definitions of the "Dynamic Court" and the "Constrained Court," which he considers the two possible views to be held about the court system's influence, though he believes both are over simplifications by themselves. The "Dynamic Court" sees the judiciary "as powerful, vigorous, and potent proponents of change" (Rosenberg 1991, 2). Proponents this theory alone believe the courts have great power and influence to effect social change, but Rosenberg believes the 'mystification' of the judicial system has given this view more allure than truth. Under the "Constrained Court" theory, courts are "weak, powerless, and ineffective for change," have little power nor influence to

Read More
921 Words | 4 Pages

Fortas argued Gideon 's case by using wether Betts V. Brady should be reconsidered. The Betts V. Brady case had ruled that (akin to Gideon’s) that the fourteenth amendment requires states to appoint counsel only under special circumstances. It has been an unpopular standard and was constantly criticized but nevertheless was in effect. In only two short months, the verdict for Gideon 's case had been decided, Betts V. Brady was found unconstitutional, as it violated the sixth amendment 's right to a fair and speedy trial and that looking at the fourteenth amendment, which guarantees due process of law, the court was wrong to not have appointed Gideon a lawyer. The court then ruled that Gideon should be given a retrial, this time with a court appointed

Read More
685 Words | 3 Pages

The fourteenth amendment, states that no state can deny citizens due process and for equal protection. Gideon was also denied his right stated in the fourteenth

Read More
968 Words | 4 Pages

In 1961 the Florida Supreme Court denied Clarence Gideon’s request for an appointed lawyer during his trial. Gideon was poor and could not afford a lawyer and he was uneducated so he could not properly defend himself. His case applies to the Sixth Amendment which guarantees that the accused has the right to an attorney if they want one, and depriving someone’s right to counsel is a violation of due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. Despite his criminal background, Clarence Gideon’s appeal to the United States Supreme Court in 1963 resulted in the expansion of the right to counsel, an important element of due process, for all Americans.

Read More
336 Words | 2 Pages

Both the state and federal courts would utilize the Supreme court as the final disposition on any case (Bohm & Haley, 2011). Ted Rubin identified the two of ten purposes of the court is to “do justice” and to

Read More
1064 Words | 5 Pages

Our Constitution has long required the criminally accused to be tried by their peers. The question before us today is whether Florida’s death sentencing scheme violates the Sixth Amendment in light of the decision in Ring v. Arizona., 536 U.S. 584 (2002). We hold that it does violate the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial. I

Read More
1014 Words | 5 Pages

He appealed his case to the Supreme Court and they accepted. They declared that the rule that an attorney must be provided to someone if the needed one was constitutional. Gideon was tried again and was defended by an attorney provided to him by the state of Florida. He won the case and set the

Read More
798 Words | 4 Pages

Clarence E. Gideon fought for the right for everyone, no matter the special circumstances, to have legal representation in court. This was Gideon’s promise. However, his promise is lost in transition. Although people are now receiving the legal counsel they needed, the quality of the legal counsel is not what they deserve. These counsel are sometimes unfit for the trials they are given causing unfair and often wrongful decisions.

Read More
791 Words | 4 Pages

“Our courts have our faults, as does any human institution, but in this country our courts are the great levelers, and in our courts all men are created equal.” His message was loud and clear but the outcome did not have the desired

Read More
747 Words | 3 Pages

Each State conducts its own criminal justice system, separate from federal authority, under the reserved powers of the Constitution. Alabama has its own bill of rights that recognizes the right of the accused to obtain counsel, but does not require the State to pay for attorneys to defend accused persons.” As for Powell the argument stated was this, “The young black men 's right to counsel was so fundamental to criminal proceedings that any trial conducted without a defense attorney was not a fair trial at all. Alabama 's conduct of the trial was unfair—a violation of a basic rule of decency and justice under the Constitution.” These two vastly different arguments made it rather challenging for the Supreme court to make a decision that was not favoring one side.

Read More
803 Words | 4 Pages

The American court system does not function as a single entity that adjudicates all claims presented before it but as divided courts representing the individual fifty state governments and one the central federal government in a judicial federalism structure. The United States Constitution binds the federal government as it examines the cases before it, and each state government is obligated to its state constitution when rendering decisions. Claims that can originate in either or both systems further complicate matters. These dual challenges have led to a more complex system where each state’s courts and federal courts interpret the other’s laws (Schapiro, 1999, 2023). Judicial federalism recognizes the independence of the individual fifty

Read More
188 Words | 1 Pages

U.S. district courts, U.S. courts of appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court make up the three-tiered hierarchy of the federal court system. U.S. district courts are the trial courts. They have jurisdiction over cases concerning violations of federal law. There are 13 U.S. courts of appeals or circuit courts. These courts are located in major cities and the cases are heard by a number of associate justices.

Read More
972 Words | 4 Pages

Furthermore, if a defendant could provide a “prima facie” case, the ruling could be altered. Prima facie means that if a defendant could present a case of factual evidence to prove a pattern of discrimination in the jurisdiction, then the case can be presented to the court. Swain’s case is important because it presented a significant argument against the use of peremptory challenges. The ruling however, provided not protection for Hispanics or African Americans from racially provoked peremptory challenges. The use of these challenges denies African American’s and Hispanics the chance to be tried by an impartial jury of their peers.

Read More
644 Words | 3 Pages

Wainwright illustrated the importance of personal rights guaranteed by the constitution. This case began when Clarence Gideon was denied a court appointed lawyer to represent him in a petty crime case. Gideon, unable to afford his own lawyer, was unable to adequately defend himself and consequently was convicted. However, he was undeterred. Gideon then wrote a letter to the Supreme Court to overturn this conviction with the 6th Amendment as his evidence of the court’s misconduct.

Read More

More about Gideon Vs Wainwright Case Analysis

Open Document