text:
Gideon v. Wainwright
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Gideon v. Wainwright
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued January 15, 1963
Decided March 18, 1963
Full case name
Clarence E. Gideon v. Louie L. Wainwright, Corrections Director.
Citations
372 U.S. 335 (more)
83 S. Ct. 792; 9 L. Ed. 2d 799; 5951 U.S. LEXIS 1942; 23 Ohio Op. 2d 258; 93 A.L.R.2d 733;
Argument
Oral argument
Prior history
Defendant convicted, Bay County, Florida Circuit Court (1961); habeas petition denied w/o opinion, sub. nom. Gideon v. Cochrane, 135 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 1961)
Subsequent history
On remand, 153 So. 2d 299 (Fla. 1963); defendant acquitted, Bay County, Florida Circuit Court (1963)
Holding
The Sixth Amendment right to counsel is a fundamental right applied to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution's due process clause, and requires that indigent criminal defendants be provided counsel at trial. Supreme Court of Florida reversed.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Earl Warren
Associate Justices
Hugo Black · William O. Douglas
Tom C. Clark · John M. Harlan II
William J. Brennan Jr. · Potter Stewart
Byron White · Arthur Goldberg
Case opinions
Majority
Black, joined by Warren, Brennan, Stewart, White, Goldberg
Concurrence
Clark
Concurrence
Harlan
Concurrence
Douglas
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amends. VI, XIV
This case overturned a previous ruling or rulings
Betts v. Brady (1942)
Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963), is a landmark case in United States Supreme Court history. In it, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that states are required under the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to provide counsel (Attorneys) in criminal cases to represent defendants who are unable to afford to pay their own attorneys. The case extended the right to counsel, which had been found under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to impose requirements on the federal government, by ruling that this right imposed those requirements upon the states as well.
Contents
[hide]
1 Facts and prior history
2 Court decision
3 Implications
3.1 Impact on courts
3.1.1 Public defender system
3.2 Right to counsel
4 See also
5 References
6 Further reading
7 External links
Facts and prior history[edit]
Between midnight and 8:00 a.m. on June 3, 1961, a burglary occurred at the Bay Harbor Pool Room in Panama City, Florida. An unknown person broke a door, smashed a cigarette machine and a record player, and stole money from a cash register. Later that day, a witness reported that he had seen Clarence Earl Gideon in the poolroom at around 5:30 that morning, leaving with a wine bottle and money in his pockets. Based on this accusation alone, the police arrested Gideon and charged him with breaking and entering with intent to commit petty larceny.
Gideon appeared in court alone as he was too poor to afford counsel, whereupon the following conversation took place:[1]
The COURT: Mr. Gideon, I am sorry, but I cannot appoint counsel to represent you in this case. Under the laws of the State of Florida, the only time the court can appoint counsel to represent a defendant is when that person is charged with a capital offense. I am sorry, but I will have to deny your request to appoint counsel to defend you in this case.
GIDEON: The United States Supreme Court says I am entitled to be represented by counsel.
The Florida court declined to appoint counsel for Gideon. As a result, he was forced to act as his own counsel and conduct his own defense in court, emphasizing his innocence in the case. At the conclusion of the trial the jury returned a guilty verdict. The court sentenced Gideon to serve five years in the state prison.
From the cell at Florida State Prison, making use of the prison library and writing in pencil on prison stationery,[2] Gideon appealed to the United States Supreme Court in a suit against the Secretary of the Florida Department of Corrections, H.G. Cochran. Cochran later retired and was replaced with Louie L. Wainwright before the case was heard by the Supreme Court. Gideon argued in his appeal that he had been denied counsel and, therefore, his Sixth Amendment rights, as applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment, had been violated.
The Supreme Court assigned Gideon a prominent Washington, D.C., attorney, future Supreme Court justice Abe Fortas of the law firm Arnold, Fortas & Porter. Opposing, Bruce Jacob, who later became Dean of the Mercer University School of Law and Dean of Stetson University College of Law, argued the case for the State of Florida.[3] Fortas was assisted by longtime Arnold, Fortas & Porter partner Abe Krash and famed legal scholar John Hart Ely, then a third-year student at Yale Law School.[4]
Court decision[edit]
The first page of Gideon's handwritten petition for a writ of cert to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court's decision was announced on March 18, 1963, and delivered by Justice Hugo Black. The decision was announced as unanimous in favor of Gideon.[5] Three concurring opinions were written by Justices Clark, Douglas and Stone. The Supreme Court decision specifically cited its previous ruling in Powell v. Alabama. Whether or not the decision in Powell v. Alabama applied to non-capital cases had sparked heated debate. Betts v. Brady had earlier held that, unless certain circumstances were present, such as illiteracy or stupidity of the defendant, or an especially complicated case, there was no need for a court-appointed attorney in state court criminal proceedings. Betts had thus provided selective application of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel to the states, depending on the circumstances, as the Sixth Amendment had only been held binding in federal cases. Gideon v. Wainwright overruled Betts v. Brady, instead holding that the assistance of counsel, if desired by a defendant who could not afford to hire counsel, was a fundamental right under the United States Constitution, binding on the states, and essential for a fair trial and due process of law regardless of the circumstances of the case.
Justice Clark's concurring opinion stated that the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution does not distinguish between capital and non-capital cases, so legal counsel must be provided for an indigent defendant in all cases.[3] Justice Harlan's concurring opinion stated that the mere existence of a serious criminal charge in itself constituted special circumstances requiring the services of counsel at trial.
The Supreme Court remanded the case to the Supreme Court of Florida for "further action not inconsistent with this decision."
Gideon v. Wainwright was one of a series of Supreme Court decisions that confirmed the right of defendants in criminal proceedings, upon request, to have counsel appointed both during trial and on appeal. In the subsequent cases of Massiah v. United States, 377 U.S. 201 (1964) and Miranda v. Arizona 384 U.S. 436 (1966), the Supreme Court further extended the rule to apply even during police interrogation.
Implications[edit]
About 2000 individuals who had been convicted were freed in Florida alone as a result of the Gideon decision. The decision did not directly result in Gideon being freed; instead, he received a new trial with the appointment of defense counsel at the government's expense.
Gideon chose W. Fred Turner to be his lawyer in his second trial. The retrial took place on August 5, 1963, five months after the Supreme Court ruling. Turner, during the trial, picked apart the testimony of eyewitness Henry Cook, and in his opening and closing statements suggested that Cook likely had been a lookout for a group of young men who broke into the poolroom to steal beer, then grabbed the coins while they were there. Turner also obtained a statement from the cab driver who had taken Gideon from Bay Harbor, Florida to a bar in Panama City, Florida, stating that Gideon was carrying neither wine, beer nor Coke when he picked him up, even though Cook testified that he had watched Gideon walk from the pool hall to the phone, and then wait for a cab. This testimony completely discredited Cook.
The jury acquitted Gideon after one hour of deliberation. After his acquittal, Gideon resumed his previous life and married again some time later. He died of cancer in Fort Lauderdale on January 18, 1972, at age 61. Gideon's family in Missouri accepted his body and laid him to rest in an unmarked grave. A granite headstone was added later.[6] It was inscribed with a quote from a letter Gideon wrote to Abe Fortas, the attorney appointed to represent him in the Supreme Court: "Each era finds an improvement in law for the benefit of mankind."[7]
Impact on courts[edit]
The former "incorrect trial" rule, where the government was given a fair amount of latitude in criminal proceedings as long as there were no "shocking departures from fair procedure" was discarded in favor of a firm set of "procedural guarantees" based on the Constitution. The court reversed Betts and adopted rules that did not require a case-by-case analysis, but instead established the requirement of appointed counsel as a matter of right, without a defendant's having to show "special circumstances" that justified the appointment of counsel.[6] In this way, the case helped to refine stare decisis: when a prior appellate court decision should be upheld and what standard should be applied to test a new case against case precedent to achieve acceptable practice and due process of law.[8] This confusion resulted in the implementation of several new practices by the Supreme Court when overturning a previous ruling to maintain the "impersonal qualities of the judicial process" and keep the sense that the legal system is without feeling or prejudice and simply applies justice to those who come before it.[9]
Public defender system[edit]
Many changes have been made in the prosecution and legal representation of indigent defendants since the Gideon decision. The decision created and then expanded the need for public defenders which had previously been rare. For example, immediately following the decision, Florida required public defenders in all of the state's circuit courts.[10] The need for more public defenders also led to a need to ensure that they were properly trained in criminal defense in order to allow defendants to receive as fair a trial as possible. Several states and counties followed suit. Washington D.C., for instance, has created a training program for their public defenders, who must receive rigorous training before they are allowed to represent defendants, and must continue their training in order to remain current in criminal law, procedure, and practices.[11] In 2010, a public defender's office in the South Bronx, The Bronx Defenders, created the Center for Holistic Defense, which has helped other public defender offices, from Montana to Massachusetts, developed a model of public defense called holistic defense or holistic advocacy. In it, criminal defense attorneys work on interdisciplinary teams, alongside civil attorneys, social workers, and legal advocates to help clients with not only direct but also collateral aspects of their criminal cases. More recently the American Bar Association and the National Legal Aid and Defender Association have set minimum training requirements, caseload levels, and experience requirements for defenders.[11] There is often controversy whether case loads set upon public defenders give them enough time to sufficiently defend their clients. Some criticize the mindset in which public defense lawyers encourage their clients to simply plead guilty. Some defenders say this is intended to lessen their own work load, while others would say it is intended to obtain a lighter sentence by negotiating a plea bargain as compared with going to trial and perhaps having a harsher sentence imposed. Tanya Greene, an ACLU lawyer, has said that is why 90 to 95 percent of defendants do plead guilty: "You've got so many cases, limited resources, and there's no relief. You go to work, you get more cases. You have to triage."[12]
Right to counsel[edit]
The Doughty v. Maxwell decision demonstrates the differences between how states and the federal government address standards for waiver of the right to counsel. In this case the Supreme Court granted certiorari and reversed the decision of the state court in Doughty, which held that regardless of Gideon, the defendant waived his or her right to appointed counsel by entering a plea of guilty. The underlying alleged crime and trial in Doughty took place in Ohio, which had its own way of interpreting the right to counsel as do many states. Pennsylvania and West Virginia also deemed that the right to counsel was waived when a plea of guilty was entered. Depending upon one's viewpoint, rules such as these could be seen as an attempt by a state to establish reasonable rules in criminal cases or as an attempt to save money even at the expense of denying a defendant due process. This varies a great deal from federal law, which generally has stricter guidelines for waiving the right to counsel. An analogous area of criminal law is the circumstances under which a criminal defendant can waive the right to trial. Under federal law, the defendant can only waive his or her right to trial if it is clear that the defendant understands the "charges, the consequences of the various pleas, and the availability of counsel".[13] State laws on the subject are often not as strict, making it easier for prosecutors to obtain a defendant's waiver of the right to trial.
See also[edit]
Gideon's Trumpet, a book and TV movie based on this case
Gideon's Army, a documentary film about public defenders in the American South
List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 372
Public defender
Miranda warning
References[edit]
Jump up ^ "Gideon v. Wainwright". LII / Legal Information Institute.
Jump up ^ "Petition for a Writ of Certiorari from Clarence Gideon to the Supreme Court of the United States, 01/05/1962". The National Archives. Retrieved 9 November 2014.
^ Jump up to: a b "Clarence Earl Gideon, Petitioner, vs. Louis L. Wainwright, Director, Department of Corrections, Respondent". World Digital Library. 1963. Retrieved 2013-08-03.
Jump up ^ Krash, Abe (March 1998). "Architects of Gideon: Remembering Abe Fortas and Hugo Black". The Champion. NACDL. Retrieved 24 October 2013.
Jump up ^ "Gideon v. Wainwright". Oyez. Chicago-Kent College of Law at Illinois Tech,. Retrieved December 21, 2016.
^ Jump up to: a b Beaney, William M. (1963). "The Right to Counsel: Past, Present, and Future". Virginia Law Review. 49 (6): 1150–1159 [p. 1153]. doi:10.2307/1071050. JSTOR 1071050.
Jump up ^ King, Jack. "Clarence Earl Gideon: Unlikely World-Shaker". National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL). Retrieved 10 December 2014.
Jump up ^ Israel, Jerold H. (1963). "Gideon v. Wainwright: The 'Art' of Overruling". The Supreme Court Review. The University of Chicago Press. 1963: 211–272 [p. 218]. JSTOR 3108734.
Jump up ^ Israel (1963), p. 219.
Jump up ^ "Gideon's Promise, Still Unkept". The New York Times. 1993-03-18. Retrieved 2008-08-08.
^ Jump up to: a b Abel, Laura. "2006 Edward v. Sparer Symposium: Civil Gideon: Creating a Constitutional Right to Counsel in the Civil Context: A Right to Counsel in Civil Cases: Lessons from Gideon v. Wainwright". Temple Political & Civil Rights Law Review, Volume 15. Summer 2006.
Jump up ^ Daniel June (May 7, 2013). "How Well are the Poor Publicly Defended?". jdjournal.com.
Jump up ^ "Waiver of the Right to Counsel in State Court Cases: The Effect of Gideon v. Wainwright". University of Chicago Law Review. The University of Chicago Law Review. 31 (3): 591–602. 1964. doi:10.2307/1598554. JSTOR 1598554.
Further reading[edit]
"Gideon's Promise Unfulfilled: The Need for Litigated Reform of Indigent Defense". Harvard Law Review. The Harvard Law Review Association. 113 (8): 2062–2079. 2000. doi:10.2307/1342319. JSTOR 1342319.
Green, Bruce (June 2013). "Gideon's Amici: Why Do Prosecutors So Rarely Defend the Rights of the Accused?". Yale Law Journal. 122 (8): 2336–2357. The article describes how 23 state attorneys-general, led by Walter F. Mondale of Minnesota and Edward J. McCormack, Jr. of Massachusetts, when asked by Florida to participate as amici curiae, surprised the Florida Attorney General by submitting a "friend of the court" brief to the Supreme Court on the side of the accused, and advocating for the right to counsel of criminal defendants to defense counsel at the expense of the state.
Uelmen, Gerald F. (1995). "2001: A Train Ride: A Guided Tour of the Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel". Law and Contemporary Problems. Duke University School of Law. 58 (1): 13–29. doi:10.2307/1192165. JSTOR 1192165.
Van Alstyne, William W. (1965). "In Gideon's Wake: Harsher Penalties and the 'Successful' Criminal Appellant". Yale Law Journal. The Yale Law Journal Company, Inc. 74 (4): 606–639. doi:10.2307/794613. JSTOR 794613.
External links[edit]
Works related to Gideon v. Wainwright at Wikisource
Text of Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963) is available from: Findlaw Justia LectLaw
[hide]
v
t
e
United States Sixth Amendment case law
[show]
Speedy Trial Clause
Beavers v. Haubert (1905)
United States v. Provoo (1955)
Pollard v. United States (1957)
United States v. Ewell (1966)
Klopfer v. North Carolina (1967)
Smith v. Hooey (1969)
Dickey v. Florida (1970)
United States v. Marion (1971)
Barker v. Wingo (1972)
Strunk v. United States (1973)
United States v. Lovasco (1977)
United States v. MacDonald (1982)
United States v. Loud Hawk (1986)
Doggett v. United States (1992)
Vermont v. Brillon (2009)
Betterman v. Montana (2016)
[show]
Public Trial Clause
Gaines v. Washington (1928)
In re Oliver (1948)
Gannett Co., Inc. v. DePasquale (1979)
Waller v. Georgia (1984)
Presley v. Georgia (2010)
[show]
Impartial Jury Clause
Availability
Callan v. Wilson (1888)
Natal v. State (1891)
Schick v. United States (1904)
District of Columbia v. Colts (1930)
District of Columbia v. Clawans (1937)
United States v. Barnett (1964)
Cheff v. Schnackenberg (1966)
Duncan v. Louisiana (1968)
Bloom v. Illinois (1968)
DeStefano v. Woods (1968)
Frank v. United States (1969)
Baldwin v. New York (1970)
Mayberry v. Pennsylvania (1971)
Taylor v. Haynes (1974)
Codispoti v. Pennsylvania (1974)
Blanton v. North Las Vegas (1989)
United States v. Nachtigal (1993)
Lewis v. United States (1996)
Impartiality
Reynolds v. United States (1878)
Connors v. United States (1895)
Aldridge v. United States (1931)
Glasser v. United States (1942)
Dennis v. United States (1950)
Irvin v. Dowd (1961)
Beck v. Washington (1962)
Rideau v. Louisiana (1963)
Sheppard v. Maxwell (1966)
Witherspoon v. Illinois (1968)
Ham v. South Carolina (1973)
Murphy v. Florida (1975)
Ristaino v. Ross (1976)
Adams v. Texas (1980)
Rosales-Lopez v. United States (1981)
Patton v. Yount (1984)
Wainwright v. Witt (1985)
Turner v. Murray (1986)
Lockhart v. McCree (1986)
Gray v. Mississippi (1987)
Ross v. Oklahoma (1988)
Mu'Min v. Virginia (1991)
Morgan v. Illinois (1992)
United States v. Martinez-Salazar (2000)
Skilling v. United States (2010)
McDonnell v. United States (2016)
Facts found
McMillan v. Pennsylvania (1986)
Walton v. Arizona (1990)
Almendarez-Torres v. United States (1998)
Jones v. United States (1999)
Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000)
Harris v. United States (2002)
Ring v. Arizona (2002)
Blakely v. Washington (2004)
Schriro v. Summerlin (2004)
United States v. Booker (2005)
Washington v. Recuenco (2006)
Cunningham v. California (2007)
Oregon v. Ice (2009)
Southern Union Co. v. United States (2012)
Alleyne v. United States (2013)
Hurst v. Florida (2016)
Size and unanimity
Thompson v. Utah (1898)
Maxwell v. Dow (1900)
Rassmussen v. United States (1905)
Patton v. United States (1930)
Williams v. Florida (1970)
Apodaca v. Oregon (1972)
Ballew v. Georgia (1978)
Burch v. Louisiana (1979)
Vicinage Clause
United States v. Dawson (1853)
Jones v. United States (1890)
Cook v. United States (1891)
Burton v. United States (1905, 1906)
Ruthenberg v. United States (1918)
Lewis v. United States (1929)
United States v. Cabrales (1998)
Impeachment of verdicts
McDonald v. Pless (1915)
Tanner v. United States (1987)
Warger v. Shauers (2014)
Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado (2017)
[show]
Information Clause
Twitchell v. Pennsylvania (1868)
Cole v. Arkansas (1948)
Russell v. United States (1962)
Rabe v. Washington (1972)
[show]
Confrontation Clause
Out-of-court statements
Reynolds v. United States (1878)
Mattox v. United States (1895)
Kirby v. United States (1899)
Motes v. United States (1900)
Dowdell v. United States (1911)
Pointer v. Texas (1965)
Brookhart v. Janis (1966)
Barber v. Page (1968)
Bruton v. United States (1968)
Berger v. California (1969)
Frazier v. Cupp (1969)
California v. Green (1970)
Dutton v. Evans (1970)
Mancusi v. Stubbs (1972)
Ohio v. Roberts (1980)
Tennessee v. Street (1985)
Delaware v. Fensterer (1985)
United States v. Inadi (1986)
Lee v. Illinois (1986)
Crawford v. Washington (2004)
Davis v. Washington (2006)
Whorton v. Bockting (2007)
Giles v. California (2008)
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts (2009)
Michigan v. Bryant (2011)
Bullcoming v. New Mexico (2011)
Williams v. Illinois (2012)
Ohio v. Clark (2015)
Face-to-face confrontation
Snyder v. Massachusetts (1934)
Kentucky v. Stincer (1987)
Coy v. Iowa (1988)
Maryland v. Craig (1990)
Restrictions on cross-examination
Douglas v. Alabama (1965)
McCray v. Illinois (1967)
Smith v. Illinois (1968)
Chambers v. Mississippi (1973)
Davis v. Alaska (1974)
Delaware v. Fensterer (1985)
Delaware v. Van Arsdall (1986)
Right to present relevant evidence
Cooper v. California (1967)
McCray v. Illinois (1967)
Pennsylvania v. Ritchie (1987)
Olden v. Kentucky (1988)
Michigan v. Lucas (1991)
[show]
Compulsory Process Clause
Washington v. Texas (1967)
United States v. Valenzuela-Bernal (1982)
Taylor v. Illinois (1988)
[hide]
Assistance of Counsel Clause
Choice
Chandler v. Fretag (1954)
Morris v. Slappy (1983)
Wheat v. United States (1988)
Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered v. United States (1989)
United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez (2006)
Appointment
Powell v. Alabama (1932)
Johnson v. Zerbst (1938)
Betts v. Brady (1942)
Hamilton v. Alabama (1961)
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
Anders v. California (1967)
Argersinger v. Hamlin (1972)
Gagnon v. Scarpelli (1973)
Scott v. Illinois (1979)
Baldasar v. Illinois (1980)
Pennsylvania v. Finley (1987)
McCoy v. Court of Appeals of Wisconsin (1988)
Penson v. Ohio (1988)
Murray v. Giarratano (1989)
Nichols v. United States (1994)
Smith v. Robbins (2000)
Alabama v. Shelton (2002)
Constructive denial
Avery v. Alabama (1940)
Ferguson v. Georgia (1961)
Brooks v. Tennessee (1972)
Herring v. New York (1975)
Geders v. United States (1976)
Perry v. Leeke (1989)
Conflict-free
Glasser v. United States (1942)
Dukes v. Warden (1972)
Holloway v. Arkansas (1978)
Cuyler v. Sullivan (1980)
Burger v. Kemp (1987)
Wheat v. United States (1988)
Mickens v. Taylor (2002)
Ineffective assistance
McMann v. Richardson (1970)
Jones v. Barnes (1983)
United States v. Cronic (1984)
Strickland v. Washington (1984)
Hill v. Lockhart (1985)
Nix v. Whiteside (1986)
Kimmelman v. Morrison (1986)
Lockhart v. Fretwell (1993)
Smith v. Robbins (2000)
Roe v. Flores-Ortega (2000)
Williams v. Taylor (2000)
Glover v. United States (2001)
Bell v. Cone (2002)
Woodford v. Visciotti (2002)
Wiggins v. Smith (2003)
Holland v. Jackson (2004)
Florida v. Nixon (2004)
Rompilla v. Beard (2005)
Schriro v. Landrigan (2007)
Wright v. Van Patten (2008)
Knowles v. Mirzayance (2009)
Bobby v. Van Hook (2009)
Wong v. Belmontes (2009)
Porter v. McCollum (2009)
Wood v. Allen (2010)
Padilla v. Kentucky (2010)
Sears v. Upton (2010)
Premo v. Moore (2011)
Harrington v. Richter (2011)
Cullen v. Pinholster (2011)
Missouri v. Frye (2012)
Lafler v. Cooper (2012)
Buck v. Davis (2017)
Weaver v. Massachusetts (2017)
Jae Lee v. United States (2017)
Uncounseled statements
Massiah v. United States (1963)
Brewer v. Williams (1977)
United States v. Henry (1980)
Maine v. Moulton (1985)
Kuhlmann v. Wilson (1986)
Kansas v. Ventris (2009)
Pro se representation
Faretta v. California (1975)
McKaskle v. Wiggins (1984)
Rock v. Arkansas (1987)
Martinez v. California Court of Appeals (2000)
Indiana v. Edwards (2008)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gideon_v._Wainwright&oldid=828160546"
Categories:
United States Supreme Court decisions that overrule a prior Supreme Court decision
United States Supreme Court cases
1963 in United States case law
20th century American trials
United States Sixth Amendment appointment of counsel case law
Incorporation case law
American Civil Liberties Union litigation
United States Supreme Court cases of the Warren Court
Legal history of Florida
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Simple English
中文
Edit links
This page was last edited on 28 February 2018, at 22:27.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

value: th

attrs: colspan class style

values: text-align:center;font-size:125%;font-weight:bold;background-color: #99c0ff; padding: 0.2em; line-height:1.3em; font-style: italic

values: Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg

attrs: colspan style

values: Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values:
/wiki/Due_process_clause
mw-redirect
Due process clause

values: margin:0; padding:0.1em 0.5em; text-align:center; line-height:1.3em;

values: background-color: green; color: white; font-weight: bold

values:
infobox scotus
width:22em;line-height: 1.3em

values:
/wiki/Landmark_decision
mw-redirect
Landmark decision

values:
/wiki/U.S._Constitution
mw-redirect
U.S. Constitution

values: Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values:
/wiki/Stare_decisis
mw-redirect
Stare decisis

values:
/wiki/Public_defenders
mw-redirect
Public defenders

values: National Legal Aid and Defender Association

values:
nofollow
http://www.wdl.org/en/item/3935/
external text

values:
nofollow
external text
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1962/155

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F1071050

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.jstor.org/stable/1071050

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.jstor.org/stable/3108734

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F1598554

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.jstor.org/stable/1598554

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F1342319

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.jstor.org/stable/1342319

values:
/wiki/Walter_F._Mondale
mw-redirect
Walter F. Mondale

values:
/wiki/Edward_J._McCormack,_Jr.
mw-redirect
Edward J. McCormack, Jr.

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F1192165

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.jstor.org/stable/1192165

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F794613

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.jstor.org/stable/794613

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/case17.htm

values: Beavers v. Haubert (page does not exist)

values: United States v. Provoo (page does not exist)

values: Pollard v. United States (page does not exist)

values: United States v. Ewell (page does not exist)

values: United States v. Marion (page does not exist)

values: Strunk v. United States (page does not exist)

values: United States v. Lovasco (page does not exist)

values: United States v. MacDonald (page does not exist)

values: United States v. Loud Hawk (page does not exist)

values: Vermont v. Brillon (page does not exist)

values: nowraplinks collapsible collapsed navbox-subgroup

values: Gaines v. Washington (page does not exist)

values: Gannett Co., Inc. v. DePasquale (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Presley_v._Georgia
mw-redirect
Presley v. Georgia

values: Schick v. United States (page does not exist)

values: District of Columbia v. Colts (page does not exist)

values: District of Columbia v. Clawans (page does not exist)

values: United States v. Barnett (page does not exist)

values: DeStefano v. Woods (page does not exist)

values: Frank v. United States (page does not exist)

values: Baldwin v. New York (page does not exist)

values: Mayberry v. Pennsylvania (page does not exist)

values: Codispoti v. Pennsylvania (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Blanton_v._North_Las_Vegas
mw-redirect
Blanton v. North Las Vegas

values: United States v. Nachtigal (page does not exist)

values: Lewis v. United States (page does not exist)

values: Connors v. United States (page does not exist)

values: Aldridge v. United States (page does not exist)

values: Dennis v. United States (1950) (page does not exist)

values: Beck v. Washington (page does not exist)

values: Rideau v. Louisiana (page does not exist)

values: Rosales-Lopez v. United States (page does not exist)

values: Lockhart v. McCree (page does not exist)

values: Gray v. Mississippi (page does not exist)

values: Mu'Min v. Virginia (page does not exist)

values: United States v. Martinez-Salazar (page does not exist)

values: McMillan v. Pennsylvania (page does not exist)

values: Harris v. United States (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Rassmussen_v._United_States
mw-redirect
Rassmussen v. United States

values: Patton v. United States (1930) (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/United_States_v._Dawson
mw-redirect
United States v. Dawson

values: Jones v. United States (1890) (page does not exist)

values: Cook v. United States (page does not exist)

values: Ruthenberg v. United States (page does not exist)

values: United States v. Cabrales (page does not exist)

values: Twitchell v. Pennsylvania (page does not exist)

values: Russell v. United States (page does not exist)

values: Mattox v. United States (page does not exist)

values: Kirby v. United States (page does not exist)

values: Motes v. United States (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Dowdell_v._United_States
mw-redirect
Dowdell v. United States

values: Brookhart v. Janis (page does not exist)

values: Berger v. California (page does not exist)

values: California v. Green (page does not exist)

values: Tennessee v. Street (page does not exist)

values: Delaware v. Fensterer (page does not exist)

values: United States v. Inadi (page does not exist)

values: Williams v. Illinois (page does not exist)

values: Snyder v. Massachusetts (page does not exist)

values: Kentucky v. Stincer (page does not exist)

values: Douglas v. Alabama (page does not exist)

values: McCray v. Illinois (page does not exist)

values: Delaware v. Van Arsdall (page does not exist)

values: Cooper v. California (page does not exist)

values: Pennsylvania v. Ritchie (page does not exist)

values: Chandler v. Fretag (page does not exist)

values: Wheat v. United States (page does not exist)

values: Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered v. United States (page does not exist)

values: Baldasar v. Illinois (page does not exist)

values: McCoy v. Court of Appeals of Wisconsin (page does not exist)

values: Murray v. Giarratano (page does not exist)

values: Ferguson v. Georgia (page does not exist)

values: Brooks v. Tennessee (page does not exist)

values: Herring v. New York (page does not exist)

values: Geders v. United States (page does not exist)

values: Holloway v. Arkansas (page does not exist)

values: Cuyler v. Sullivan (page does not exist)

values: McMann v. Richardson (page does not exist)

values: United States v. Cronic (page does not exist)

values: Kimmelman v. Morrison (page does not exist)

values: Lockhart v. Fretwell (page does not exist)

values: Roe v. Flores-Ortega (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Williams_v._Taylor
mw-redirect
Williams v. Taylor

values:
/wiki/Woodford_v._Visciotti
mw-redirect
Woodford v. Visciotti

values:
/wiki/Holland_v._Jackson
mw-redirect
Holland v. Jackson

values: Schriro v. Landrigan (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Wright_v._Van_Patten
mw-redirect
Wright v. Van Patten

values: Knowles v. Mirzayance (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Bobby_v._Van_Hook
mw-redirect
Bobby v. Van Hook

values:
/wiki/Wong_v._Belmontes
mw-redirect
Wong v. Belmontes

values:
/wiki/Porter_v._McCollum
mw-redirect
Porter v. McCollum

values:
/wiki/Sears_v._Upton
mw-redirect
Sears v. Upton

values: Harrington v. Richter (page does not exist)

values: Cullen v. Pinholster (page does not exist)

values: Weaver v. Massachusetts (page does not exist)

values: Jae Lee v. United States (page does not exist)

values: United States v. Henry (page does not exist)

values: Kuhlmann v. Wilson (page does not exist)

values: Pro se legal representation in the United States

values: nowraplinks collapsible uncollapsed navbox-subgroup

values: nowraplinks collapsible expanded navbox-inner

values: Category:United States Supreme Court decisions that overrule a prior Supreme Court decision

values: Category:United States Supreme Court cases

values: Category:United States Sixth Amendment appointment of counsel case law

values: Category:American Civil Liberties Union litigation

values: Category:United States Supreme Court cases of the Warren Court

values:
catlinks mw-normal-catlinks
catlinks mw-normal-catlinks
interface

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values:
/wiki/Gideon_v._Wainwright
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values: 吉迪恩诉温赖特案 – Chinese

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Gideon_v_Wainwright rootpage-Gideon_v_Wainwright skin-vector action-view