Aspects of the Case
Clarence Gideon was charged with petty theft after a witness pointed out his presence near the crime scene. This case was destined to change the face of the legislative judiciary in America. Gideon was charged with insufficient real evidence but did not have sufficient tools to provide a defense. The Court had to decide whether sufficient evidence had been presented against Gideon, who was found with a bag of money near the crime scene.
The problem with this case, expressed in the premature and unfair conclusion of the defendant, lies in a problematic loophole in the Florida judicial law. The principle of capital crime states that Gideon cannot secure protection for himself because he is charged only with a petty crime. At the same time, he was unable to provide himself with protection also because he did not belong to the exclusion in the form of a vulnerable group of the population. Thus, he was the least protected in front of the system and therefore ended up in custody.
The Appeal of the Court Decision
Already in prison, Gideon wrote an appeal to the High Court demanding a review of the case. Gideon studied the law while incarcerated and determined that his case could be reviewed for violating his constitutional right to consultation. His petition was accepted by the Supreme Court of the United States after being rejected by the Florida Supreme Court. Abe Fortas, who advised and represented Gideon before the Court, insisted on Gideon’s low social status and poor education, which did not allow him to build a worthy defense.
1942 Case Revisited
Gideon’s ban on the use of a lawyer was based on the Betts v. Brady precedent set back in 1942. This law stated that those entities that do not have sufficient resources to pay for a lawyer could not use their services. Judges in Gideon v. Wainwright effectively reversed this precedent by approving new rules for obtaining consulting and representation services (Cotrada, 2020). This decision was a serious step towards the real democratization of the judicial process.
The Novelty of this Lawmaking
This case also demonstrates the peculiarity of the American legal system. For the 1960s, the amendment was a democratic precedent, signifying an increasing human-centered judiciary. It should be noted that the principle of precedent becoming a good example for subsequent trials is vividly expressed in the Gideon case, influencing the future of the judiciary in the United States.
Link to the Amendments
Linking the renewal of the legislative apparatus in Florida to the State Constitution Amendments deserves a separate interpretation. Making changes to the judicial project, the judges were guided by the Sixth Amendment dedicated to the rights of the criminal accused. Correspondence was also found between the rights of the defendant and the statements of the Fourteenth Amendment, according to which a citizen can in no way feel his basic privileges are constrained.
Features of the Hearing
As a result of new hearings, it was found that Gideon received no real defense, while the charges did not have sufficient weight. Most important was the fact that Gideon did not have the ability to know and control his rights. It was the jury that sentenced Gideon to five years in prison, but as a result, this sentence was reviewed by a panel of the Supreme Court.
Features of the Verdict
The Justices confirmed in a hearing that the Constitution gives every citizen who is unable to secure a lawyer the right to use the free services of one. Justice Black referred to the Sixth Amendment, while Douglas pointed to the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment (Houppert, 2018). Despite discrepancies in Justices’ statements, the Court reached a unanimous decision.
As a result of this case, in Florida alone, several thousand people were released, demanding a review of their case. Demand for lawyers has increased greatly since then, underscoring the importance of legal literacy in the new judicial environment (The United States Department of Justice, 2018). Fortas’s line of defense that any person without a legal education is defenseless before the Court made a big impression. This case is indeed one that changed the course of legal history, as it proved that a letter to a higher authority could redistribute an entire legislative system.
Cortada, X. (2020). Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 US 335 (1963). Painting Constitutional Law. Brill Nijhoff.
Houppert, K. (2018). Chasing Gideon: The elusive quest for poor people’s justice. The New Press.
The United States Department of Justice. (2018). The Legacy of Gideon v. Wainwright. Web.