Gideon V. Wainwright Case Study

The case involves the question of whether or not the police were within their rights to search the trash that was left at the curbside without a warrant. The amendment

Thing didn 't end there, he filed a habeas corpus against the court for violating his constitutional right. The Supreme Court of Connecticut granted him certiorari, over the decision of the

The amendment proponents then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Rule: Article 1, Section 4: The Times, Places, and Manner of holding

the lawyer gathered the facts and then presented them in court. They found gideon not guilty and all charges were

Gideon appears in court without money or a lawyer. Gideon asks the court to appoint him with legal counsel. Judge denies Gideon’s request for legal counsel, stating that under the laws of the State of Florida, the court can only appoint counsel when the defendant is charged with a capital offense. Gideon defends himself and carries out an: opening statement to jury, cross-examination of witnesses, declining to testify, and made a short argument emphasizing his innocence.

CSU Long Beach, Political Science Department at Long Beach Municipal and Superior Court, Long Beach CA Legal Apprentice and Researcher 1996-1997 • Conducted political research on the public defender system and provided analysis by viewing, discussing and summarizing judicial procedure(s) and Trial Judge, District Attorney, Public Defender to gain a better understanding of the efficacy of the public defender system on criminal proceedings in Long Beach and its need for key structural improvement. Accomplishments: After reading Gideon’s Trumpet as a context by which to explore and analyze the public defenders system and the social injustices that often occur, as reference by the main characters denial of his legal right to receive legal counsel in his defense in a Florida court; I related my reading and first hand experiences, observations and findings on the efficacy or lack thereof of the Public Defenders system to supervising professors at the CSU Long Beach, Department of Political Science in an attempt to suggest needed improvements to the criminal justice and judicial system. CSU Long Beach, Office of Affirmative Action - Long Beach,

Gideon’s was found guilty when he didn’t have a court appointed attorney. Gideon was also denied the right to a lawyer because he couldn’t afford one. Gideon assumed the 6th amendment granted him the rights to an attorney, but that wasn’t correct. Gideon would not take “no” for an answer. He decided to write a letter to the Supreme Court and express his concerns of his judge’s decision.

”("The Constitution of the United States," Amendment 4). As a Supreme Court

Wainwright, n.d.). Unable to afford an attorney, Gideon asked the court to appoint him one. However, during that time, under the laws of the state of Florida state, “the only time the court can appoint Counsel to represent a defendant is when that person is charged with a capital offense” (Hall, 2011, p. 76).

Some of the cases he decided on being: Talbot v. Janson, Talbot v. Janson in 1795, Hylton v. United States in 1796, Calder v. Bull in 1798, New York v. Connecticut in 1799, and Marbury v. Madison in 1803. In the case of Talbot v. Janson the Court ruled that Americans could have dual citizenship and that the jurisdiction of the court extended to the seas. Hylton v. United States was the first case in which the court challenged the constitutionality of a Congressional act. In Calder v. Bull the court decided that the ex post facto clause of the Constitution only applied to criminal cases not civil. New York v. Connecticut was the first case in which the Supreme Court used its power of Article III of the Constitution to hear arguments between states.

The US Supreme court case of Gideon v. Waignwright states that there is a right to a counsel which was decided in 1936. There were stated facts that there were no written records recorded stating a confession from George. There were no accurate witness, just hearsay and and back in those times blatant discrimination. When brought to trial, Stinnley was surrounded by an all-white jury, white judge, and after two and half hours with very little to no witnessed Stinnley was sentenced to execution and his attorney decided not to appeal and retry the case. Also in a political aspect how

On Church of Latter-Day Saints v. Amos, Mayson has been employed for 16 years by Latter-Day Saints for 16 years. In 1981, he was discharged due to ineligibility for a temple recommend, thus a a non member of the church is not qualified to attend to to the temples which is part of his duty as a building engineer. The issue is whether or not the religious employers violate the First Amendment by discriminating on religious grounds in hiring nonreligious jobs. Although the district court ruled in favor of Mayson and ordered reinstatement with backpay, the court of appeals reversed the judgment. Taking into account the Ministerial Exemption under Title VII, religious organizations are protected under the First Amendment.

The problem arose when the police officers said they had not advised Miranda of his right to an attorney. Miranda’s lawyer was concerned that his Sixth Amendment Right had been violated. This case was noticed by the ACLU and was taken to the Supreme Court. This case raised issues within the Supreme Court on the rights of Criminal Defendants.

The structure of the book has placed it at the top of the reading list for aspiring law students. It effectively maps out the Supreme Court’s ruling history and also the crucial turning point of progressing American civil liberties. Robert F. Kennedy commented on Gideon’s perseverance stating, “If an obscure Florida convict named Clarence Earl Gideon had not sat down in prison with a pencil and paper to write a letter to the Supreme Court; and if the Supreme Court had not taken the trouble to look at the merits in that one crude petition among all the bundles of mail it must receive every day, the vast machinery of

Wainwright illustrated the importance of personal rights guaranteed by the constitution. This case began when Clarence Gideon was denied a court appointed lawyer to represent him in a petty crime case. Gideon, unable to afford his own lawyer, was unable to adequately defend himself and consequently was convicted. However, he was undeterred. Gideon then wrote a letter to the Supreme Court to overturn this conviction with the 6th Amendment as his evidence of the court’s misconduct.