Gideon V Wainwright

Background:

Gideon was charged by the Florida state court with breaking and entering, because he didn’t have the resources to employ a lawyer in his defence he asked one to be appointed for him. The court refused this request because it only applied in federal cases. So, Gideon defended himself and was convicted for 5 years in a state prison.

Issue:

                Does the refusal to appoint an attourney to Gideon violate his right to a fair trial and due process which is protected by his Sixth and Fourteeenth Amendments?

Decision:

In a 9v0 vote the Supreme court sided with Gideon proposing that it was unfair that he was not appointed a lawyer.

Opinion was unanimous

Opinion:

For this case I completely agree with the Supreme Court. The fact that the amendment only applied to federal cases is ridiculous. All people should be allowed a lawyer if they want one. It is not fair if one side has a educated lawyer and one side does not. That violates the idea of a fair trial. I completely believe that for one side not to have a lawyer because they cannot afford one is totally absurd and unfair.

	Like Justice Black said "lawyers in criminal courts are necessities, not luxuries."