Gideon V. Wainwright
Case name: Clarence E. Gideon v. Louie L. Wainwright, Corrections Director
Year decided: 1963
Result: 9-0, in favor of Gideon
Related constitutional issue/amendment: Sixth Amendment (right to counsel)
Civil rights or civil liberties: civil liberties
Significance/precedent: The Court held that the founding fathers placed great value on the right of the accused to put forth a proper and competent defense and that it is accordant with the Constitution to require states to appoint attorneys for defendants who are unable to obtain counsel on their own. Furthermore, the Fourteenth Amendment does not extend a watered-down or diluted form of the Bill of Rights to the states and the right to counsel is a component of due process and to apply the right to counsel to some cases but not others is illogical.
Quote from majority opinion: "From the very beginning, our state and national constitutions and laws have laid great emphasis on procedural and substantive safeguards designed to assure fair trials before impartial tribunals in which every defendant stands equal before the law. This noble ideal cannot be realized if the poor man charged with crime has to face his accusers without a lawyer to assist him."
Six-word summary: Can't afford attorney, one'll be provided.
Year decided: 1963
Result: 9-0, in favor of Gideon
Related constitutional issue/amendment: Sixth Amendment (right to counsel)
Civil rights or civil liberties: civil liberties
Significance/precedent: The Court held that the founding fathers placed great value on the right of the accused to put forth a proper and competent defense and that it is accordant with the Constitution to require states to appoint attorneys for defendants who are unable to obtain counsel on their own. Furthermore, the Fourteenth Amendment does not extend a watered-down or diluted form of the Bill of Rights to the states and the right to counsel is a component of due process and to apply the right to counsel to some cases but not others is illogical.
Quote from majority opinion: "From the very beginning, our state and national constitutions and laws have laid great emphasis on procedural and substantive safeguards designed to assure fair trials before impartial tribunals in which every defendant stands equal before the law. This noble ideal cannot be realized if the poor man charged with crime has to face his accusers without a lawyer to assist him."
Six-word summary: Can't afford attorney, one'll be provided.
