See paper instructions

Gideon v. Wainwright
Name
Institutional Affiliation
Abstract
Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963 is a prominent case in the legal history of the US. The case gives poor defendants the right to have legal representation during the trial process. It is the responsibility of the court judge to ensure that the poor defendant accesses the important constitutional right of counsel. Clarence Earl Gideon is the defendant in the case for the misdemeanor. However, he did not get the services of a counsel despite informing the judge that it is his constitutional right. The Florida Supreme court supports the decision of the lower court due to the Betts v. Brady, 1943 case. Also, the Florida law requires legal representation for defendants who have capital charges. Gideon sought the intervention of the US Supreme Court with regards to the right of having legal representation. The highest court rules in agreement with the respondent’s opinion and overrules the Betts v. Brady 1943 decision. The Due Process Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment gives all persons the right to fair trial and legal representation.
Keywords: Gideon v. Wainwright, defendants, legal representation, constitutional right, Due Process Clause

Gideon v. Wainwright
FACTS
Clarence Earl Gideon is a prominent person in the legal history of the United States. His highest level of education is middle school. As a young adult, he was adrift. Therefore, he was an inmate on several occasions for nonviolent crimes. The court charge indicates that Gideon had the motivation for breaking to engage in a misdemeanor.

Florida law views misdemeanor as a felony case. During the trial, Gideon did not have legal representation as he could not afford the fees. In the open court session, he did not succeed in convincing the judge to appoint an attorney to represent him. The Florida law justifies the denial because legal representation is for the poor defendants who have capital offense charges (Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963). During the trial process, Gideon made an effort to represent himself. He gave the opening statement and cross-examined the witnesses. There were witnesses to defend him. However, Gideon did not provide testimony. Despite the efforts to show innocence, the court found him guilty. The sentence was five years imprisonment. Gideon challenged the conviction at the Florida Supreme Court, as the trial judge was in violation of the constitutional rights by failing to appoint counsel (Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963). The Florida Supreme Court did not agree with the petition. Then, Gideon filed a case at the US Supreme Court. The judges of the court had the desire to resolve the right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution.
ISSUE
A prior case, Betts v. Brady, 316 U.S. 455 (1942), illustrates that the denial of legal representation for the indigent defendant who has a charge for a serious crime in the court of a state does not encroach upon the Fourteenth Amendment (Betts v. Brady, 1942). The US Supreme Court gave the writ of certiorari, implying the agreement to change the ruling of the lower court, and also reconsider the Betts v. Brady case (Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963).
HOLDING
The judges disagreed with Betts v. Brady unanimously. The argument and the ruling dates were January 15, 1963, and March 18, 1963, respectively. Justice Black presented the verdict. He gave a dissenting opinion in the case (Betts v. Brady, 1942). Justices Harlan, Douglas, and Clark gave concurring opinions. The US Supreme Court communicates the fundamental right to fair trial, by the Sixth Amendment. The state court must, therefore, ensure the realization of the Due Process Clause in the US Constitution (Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963). Justice Black’s opinion was that an indigent defendant could only access fair trial unless he or she gets counsel.

References
Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963).
Betts v. Brady, 316 U.S. 455 (1942).