Gideon V. Wainwright Case

The issue in this case is should the state law provide appointment of council for defendants if they aren’t able to afford it or should they only provide appointment of council for defendants

The sixth and fourteenth amendment both protect rights having to do with due process and right to counsel.

Clarence Earl Gideon was charged with a official felony, when he broke into a pool room and had thoughts to commit a serious misdemeanor offense. He was not a rich man; therefore he could not afford a lawyer to serve on his defense. He had asked the judge to appoint him one, because according to the sixth amendment, one has the right to an attorney. However the state of Florida would not give him one. With this being said, Gideon was found guilty and sentenced five years in prison. During the five years he was in jail, he took the time to write a letter to the Florida Supreme Court explaining his situation and how he was not appointed an attorney. Due to his commitment, the case was sent to the Supreme Court.

Clarence Earl Gideon was a man with an 8th grade education only. He was convicted of Petty larceny in the state of Florida. The facts of the case are as follows. Gideon made a phone call outside of the pool hall around 5:30am the same time the pool hall was robbed. He was seen inside the pool hall, and outside the pool hall by an eye witness. Gideon asked the court to appoint a lawyer to represent him, and he was denied.At the trial Gideon defended himself as best as he could. He was unsuccessful and was convicted of breaking and entering. Gideon was sentenced to 5 years in prison, the maximum sentence for the crime.

In 1961, Clarence Earl Gideon was charged with breaking and entering into a pool hall in Florida. When he went to trial, he attempted to get an attorney to help him in court to get his crime reduced to a misdemeanor. The judge denied the attempt and he was left to fend for himself. Clarence Gideon was later proven guilty. He filed a habeas corpus petition that his denied attempt to an attorney was unlawful. The Florida Supreme Court denied his petition. Gideon sent his petition, in 1963, to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court reviewed this case, also known as the Gideon vs. Wainwright case, and decided that under the 6th amendment, the defendant is allowed to receive counsel when the defendant is being tried for a serious crime. The Gideon

There have been several different Supreme Court cases over the years that have been influential to most everybody who is aware of them. For example, the case of Roe vs. Wade was and still is immensely influential and is the cause of pro-life/pro-choice debates. Another important case was Marbury vs. Madison, which was the first Supreme Court case to ever declare that a law passed by Congress was unconstitutional. Even though those two cases were a couple of the most important and influential in American history nothing compares to the influence that the case of Gideon vs. Wainwright has provided, in my opinion. This case was tremendously important to the way that law enforcement is to be carried out in that it forced detectives and

system of codes and laws meant to be against the African Americans or of other races) to spread across the country. Rules were also conducted against African Americans to vote. Even though the law said that things and places had to be equal, this did not fall into that category. However, after a long fight, Plessy v. Ferguson was brought down when the Supreme Court held the Brown v. Board of Education in 1954. In the Gideon V. Wainwright case of 1963, a huge historical impact is credited with this case because now basically any defendant has the right to an attorney even if they cannot afford it or not. This legacy has had an impact to not only the defendants in court but to the American criminal justice system as well. The right to an appointed

Gideon v. Wainwright is a Supreme Court case that occurred in 1963 which questioned the defendant’s right of the sixth amendment. If it was not for a man in his prison cell that wrote to the Supreme Court, the United States court systems would not be the same today. Clarence Gideon was arrested because he stole money from a pool hall’s vending machines. At trial he could not afford an attorney and was not appointed counsel. If it was not for Gideon who wrote to the Supreme Court petitioning his constitutional rights he would have never had the opportunity to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. Although Clarence Gideon was an uneducated and poor citizen, he still was able to petition his constitutional rights to the United States Supreme court in order to achieve a truly fair trial. He ended discrimination in the courts against the poor who cannot afford their own counsel.

Miranda V. Arizona has been a case that impacted our police officers and offenders and is still in place today. In 1996 Phoenix Arizona Ernesto Miranda a 18 year old school drop out with a 8th grade reading level was convicted of kidnaping and rapping a 18 year old girl.. He was a troubled teen growing up convicted of small offenses but this offense made the headlights. The women who was raped went home and told her family, one day her brother sees a car that matches the description and part of the license plate Ernesto Miranda’s car matching the description and was asked to come down to the police station for questioning. Ernesto Miranda lines up with other men on a line and the women says “that looks like him but I would have to hear his voice to fully identify him”, As the integration went on he was told that a women had positively accused him, which was false. Not only did the police lie to him but after that the investigation was on for two hours, he then signed a written confession. He was found guilty and He later states that he had no right to counsel and was never read his rights this case was taken to the Arizona supreme court. The court supported the ruling so Miranda and his lawyer now took it to the united states supreme court , the constitutional issue was the 5th amendment establish the people’s rights to not have witness against them self and the 6th amendment which guarantees criminal defendants the right to an attorney was also violated. In the Supreme

America is built on the foundation of society being run and well-flowing around the three values the Republic of the United States hold most dear to: equality, freedom, and justice. The rights of the accused is an important factor in maximizing justice. Amendments 4-8 in the Bill of Rights specifically detail how criminal law should be dealt with, and how justice can be ensured every step of the way. The Fifth and Sixth Amendments contain two systems that go hand in hand with one another, a due process and a trial by jury for all citizens. Amendments 4-8, a Due Process, and a Trial by Jury are essential for establishing the rights of the accused and their absence would be detrimental to the effectiveness of the American criminal justice system.

Constitutional Amendments 4, 5, 6, part of 7, and 8 include our “Due Process” rights. Due process is defined as “a variety of procedural guarantees for those accused of crimes” The 4th amendment includes the right that protects people from unreasonable search and seizure and requires both probable cause and a warrant. It only allows the police to search for the person being arrested, things in view of that person, and things the person can reach that are in their immediate control. The 5th amendment protects against self-incrimination. People don’t have to answer any questions that might incriminate themselves and they can “plead the 5th” which means they are refusing to answer because it might incriminate them if they do. People have to be read their Miranda rights when they are being arrested and that lets them know they have the right to remain silent. The 6th amendment gives people the right to council and the right to trial by jury. So if you cannot afford an attorney you will receive a public defender to help with your case. You also have the right to a speedy and public trial by a jury of your peers. The 7th amendment protects you from being tried by a jury and then having the court overturn their decision. The 8th amendment protects against cruel and

When you think of the Amendment's, freedom of speech, right to bear arms, and many more may come to mind. But, what about the rights of the accused? The rights of the people who are accused of a crime they may or may have not committed. Well, those include the 4th, 5th, 6th 7th, and 8th Amendment. Below will explain how some of these rights protect the accused.

The Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments were created to protect American citizens and give them rights. Even know a person is arrested does not mean he or she is guilty of crime. In The United States we have a justice system in place to determine if the subject is guilty or not and to ensure that the person who was arrested rights were not violated. This includes the right to council, issued of the Miranda warning, and a speedy trial. If the subjects rights were violated this can mean rather the subject is guilty or not he or she could be let go or found not guilty. Evidence that was submitted that was found by violating a person’s rights can also be excluded from court. The Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments affect the court proceedings on day to day operations in both juvenile court and adult court.

The legal portion of the constitution is built on “innocent until proven guilty”. It establishes fairness and equality to the people.

Before it can be determined whether criminals are granted an excess number of rights, the rights that the criminals are given must be examined. Felons have the right to the Writ of Habeas Corpus. Habeas Corpus is the right for the accused to be brought in front of a judge to determine whether they are truly guilty or not (“Habeas Corpus”). A criminal can now be held for a longer period of time until they are proven guilty while also be granted a fair trial. Another right given to criminals is the trial by jury. This is the most important right granted to any felon as stated in Article III of the Constitution and by the Sixth Amendment. People accused of crimes can now be tried in front of a panel of normal citizens. The next right given to the accused is the right against self-incrimination. According to Cornell University, self-incrimination is defined as “the act of implicating oneself in a crime or exposing oneself to criminal prosecution.” The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution protects a person from being compelled to incriminate oneself. Also termed self-crimination;