Gideon Vs Wainwright Case Study

The case of Gideon v. Wainwright was argued by the Supreme Court in 1963. This was a Fourteenth Amendment case, centered on the basic right of due process owed to all persons defined in the Constitution of the United States. The facts that contributed to the issue began on June 3rd, 1961. Clarence Earl Gideon was accused by an eyewitness of breaking, entering and committing petty larceny in the Bay Pool Hall in Panama City, Florida. Said eyewitness told the police officer on the scene that he saw Gideon in the pool hall around 5:30 am, and reported to observing Gideon for a time until seeing him come out of the pool hall with a pint of wine. The witness accounted that Gideon then made a phone call and was picked up by a taxi cab shortly thereafter.

Gideon stated to the judge that he was not ready to stand trial, as he could not afford a lawyer. He asked the judge to appoint a lawyer to represent him, but the judge refused, telling Gideon that the accused were only appointed legal counsel if they were on trial for a capital crime. This had been decided in the Supreme Court case Betts v. Brady 19 years earlier. The court held at that time that not providing counsel for the poor did not violate the 14th amendment. Gideon did his best to defend himself, but did not offer up any reasoning as to what he was doing on the night of the crime. On that same day, the jury of the Trial Court in Florida found Gideon guilty, and the judge sentenced him to 5 years in prison. While Gideon was in prison, he researched the Constitution of the United States, and found that the 14th Amendment simply stated his cause, therein: “No state shall deprive any person of life, liberty or the due process of the law.” Gideon further researched the law, in order to determine the process to appeal his conviction. He found the necessary steps were first to petition the Florida court for habeas corpus, in which he wrote of the violation of his 14th amendment rights. The Florida Supreme Court ruled alongside the District Court, and denied his petition. Gideon then drafted a letter to the Supreme Court of the United States, asking for writ certiorari. He also signed an

lawyer Abe Fortas as counsel for Mr. Gideon. The Justices and legal counsel debated the reconsideration of Betts v. Brady and whether the state is the responsible party if a request for counsel is made by the accused. On March 18, 1963, The Supreme Court voted 9-0 in favor of Gideon, the decision from both lower courts was reversed and the case was remanded. This was also an overturn of Betts v. Brady, as now the legal provision for all was “Right to Counsel.” The Supreme Court explained the decision by noting that any accused that cannot afford a lawyer cannot be assured a fair trial; in addition to the 6th amendment guarantee that counsel is necessary to receive a fair trial, which applies through the 14th amendment Due Process Clause. Unfortunately for Gideon, he had to go through the trial court once again, this time with provided legal counsel. In the second trial, Gideon refused his appointed lawyers and filed a motion that this second trial was double-jeopardy according to the 5th amendment; and that the two year statute of limitation in Florida had been surpassed for the crime he was convicted of. The judge later dismissed his motion, noting that since this was an appeal to a conviction, double-jeopardy would not be considered, nor the statute of limitations. Gideon appointed his own legal counsel, who thoroughly and successfully investigated the break in and robbery of the Bay Pool Hall. On August 5th,