Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
Vocabulary
counsel: Legal advice or representation.
capital crime: Crime for which the death sentence can be
imposed.
(writ of) habeas corpus: Court order requiring that a person
in custody be brought before a court so a judge can
determine the legality of keeping him or her in jail.
writ of certiorari: An order by a higher court to a lower court
requesting the records of a case for review; the usual route
by which cases reach the Supreme Court.
in forma pauperis: Latin for “in the manner of a pauper (poor
person)”; referring to applications to the Supreme Court by
those who cannot afford the usual procedures and so are
allowed to proceed under special rules.
due process clause: Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment that
protects every person’s right to “due process of law” from
interference by state governments; used to make most Bill
of Rights protections apply to the states.
Reviewing the Case
Clarence Earl Gideon, an indigent 52-year- old
drifter, was arrested for breaking into a pool hall in
Panama City, Florida. He stood trial in a Florida
state court on a charge of breaking and entering a
pool hall with the intent to burglarize it. Appearing
in court, Gideon asked the judge to appoint an
attorney for him at state expense because he did not
have the money to pay for one himself.
In response to the request, the judge told
Gideon that under Florida law, he could not appoint
counsel except in cases involving capital crimes.
According to court records Gideon then said, “The
United States Supreme Court says I am entitled to
be represented by counsel.” Without a courtappointed lawyer, Gideon then conducted his own
defense as well as he could. (He had been tried and
convicted on earlier occasions for minor crimes.)
He made an opening statement, called witnesses on
his behalf, cross-examined the prosecution’s
witnesses, refused to testify himself, and delivered a
closing argument. He was, however, found guilty of
the charge and sent to prison for five years.
In the prison library, Gideon prepared an
appeal to the Florida Supreme Court. Asking for a
writ of habeas corpus, he claimed that the judge’s
decision to deny him a court-appointed attorney
violated rights he was guaranteed by the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The State
Supreme Court denied the appeal.
Gideon then appealed, in a handwritten
letter, to the United States Supreme Court. He again
based his case on the grounds that his right to
counsel under the Sixth and Fourteenth
Amendments had been violated. The Court issued a
writ of certiorari to the Florida courts requesting
the records of the case.
The circumstances of Gideon’s trial and the
similarities of his case to the Betts case made it a
likely case with which to reexamine the Court’s
ruling in Betts v. Brady (1942). In that case, the
Court had decided that right to counsel was not such
a fundamental right that it should always be
extended to state courts. However, Betts did require
counsel for capital cases and when the defendant
possessed certain “special circumstances” such as
mental handicaps or illiteracy.
Because Gideon had petitioned the Supreme
Court in forma pauperis the Court appointed Abe
Fortas to represent him and present his case to the
Court. Since the Betts case had become an issue,
Fortas was asked to show cause why the Court
should reconsider its decision in Betts v. Brady.
The issue that came before the Court:
Should the Court overrule Betts v. Brady (1942) and
declare that the due process clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment obligates the states to apply
the Sixth Amendment in all criminal cases?
In addition to the state of Florida, two other
states submitted statements asking the Court to
uphold the Betts decision, but 22 states asked the
Court to overrule it, claiming the decision was
outdated even at the time it was written.
The Court ruled unanimously to overrule
Betts v. Brady (1942). It declared that the
Fourteenth Amendment obligated the states to
follow the Sixth Amendment and provide counsel in
to indigent defendants in all criminal trials.
Justice Hugo Black, who, 21 years before,
had been one of the dissenting justices in the Betts
decision, wrote the unanimous opinion for the
Court. In this case, writing an opinion shared by all
the justices, Black wrote:
We accept Betts v. Brady’s assumption,
based as it was on our prior cases, that a
provision of the Bill of Rights which is
“fundamental and essential to a fair trial” is
made obligatory upon the states by the
Fourteenth Amendment. We think the Court
in Betts was wrong, however, in concluding
that the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee of
counsel is not one of these fundamental
rights....
The right of one charged with crime to
counsel may not be deemed fundamental
and essential to fair trials in some countries,
but it is in ours....This noble ideal cannot be
realized if the poor man charged with crime
has to face his accusers without a lawyer to
assist him....
Gideon’s conviction was reversed and the
case sent back to the Florida courts for further
action. This decision brought the review of
thousands of other cases throughout the country, in
which poor defendants had been tried without legal
counsel. Many people serving prison sentences
were released, while others, like Clarence Earl
Gideon, stood trial again. Gideon stood trial again
in the same court and before the same judge and
prosecutor, but with the assistance of counsel, he
was found not guilty of the charges against him. He
walked out of the courtroom a free man.
Because of Gideon’s pauper’s petition to the
United States Supreme Court, no one accused of a
crime has to stand trial in any court in the land
without benefit of counsel unless he or she
specifically refuses it. In addition, many cities have
created the position of “public defender,” a staff of
lawyers paid by the government to defend people
who cannot afford attorneys.
Name___________________________________________
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
Elements of the Case
Directions:
Fill in the appropriate information for each of the following elements of this case.
1. State the issue before the Supreme Court in this case.
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
2. What facts of the case were presented to the Court?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
3. What was the decision of the Court? What was the rationale behind it?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
4. What was the effect of the decision?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
Evaluation of the Case
Directions:
Use your own judgment to evaluate the justices’ decision and state your opinion of that
decision.
1. Do you agree that the Court made the right decision in the Gideon case, or would you have upheld the earlier Betts
decision? Explain.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
2. Would your opinion in question 1 be different if Gideon had been found guilty upon retrial? Explain.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
3. In your opinion, is it necessary to have a lawyer represent you in court to receive a fair trial? Explain.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________