Leah Mucklow
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
Chief Justice Earl Warren (1962-1965)
Issue/Topic
6th Amendment
II. Background and the Facts of the Case
Gideon was charged with breaking and entering, and the judge denied his request of a lawyer
when he was in trial in the state of Florida. The judge said the state was only required to provide
a lawyer when a person is charged with capitol offenses. He was sentenced five years in prison.
Gideon filed a habeas corpus petition challenging the legality of his conviction. He claimed that
it was his right to be provided with counsel.
III. Issue
Are states required to provide counsel to people with criminal charges because of the 6th and the
14th Amendment?
IV. Argument
Gideon’s argument was that it was his right to be provided with counsel. With the Fourteenth
Amendment, this right should be applied to the states. According to Wainwright, the director of
the Division of Corrections, there was no constitutional rights recognized for the right of counsel
when it is not in a capital criminal trial.
V. Decision
The decision they made required them to overrule a case, Betts v. Brady. States should provide
counsel to criminal defendants because of the 6th and 14th Amendments. Because they denied this
right to Gideon, the courts violated the due process clause of the 14th Amendment. “The right of
an indigent defendant in a criminal trial to have the assistance of counsel is a fundamental right
essential to a fair trial, and petitioner's trial and conviction without the assistance of counsel
violated the Fourteenth Amendment.” “
VI. Opinion
Because of the 6th and 14th Amendments, I believe Gideon had a right to be represented by a
lawyer. These amendments were made to create a fair chance.
VIII. Historical Significance of the Case
This case allowed the 6th Amendment to be applied to noncapital cases as well as capital. With
this ruling the both sides get an equal chance.
In Scott v. Illinois, (1979), the protection was extended by guaranteeing counsel "in any charge
resulting in a sentence of actual imprisonment," no matter the offense was considered a felony or
misdemeanor.
IX. Citations
"Gideon v. Wainright." Enotes. Web. <http://www.enotes.com/supreme-court-drama/muller-v-oregon>.
Hartman, Gary R., Roy M. Mersky, and Cindy L. Tate. Landmark Supreme Court Cases: the Most
Influential Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States. New York: Checkmark, 2007.
Print.