Rights of the Accused
UAB PSC 381 Bill of Rights
Fifth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, Eighth Amendment
Right to counsel failure for Scottsboro Boys,
Right to counsel guaranteed where liberty is at stake.
Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into ConflictDan Kennedy
To accompany lecture on Sheppard v. Maxwell, Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart, and related cases on the clash between First and Sixth Amendment rights.
GIDEON V. WAINWRIGHT372 U.S. 335Gideon v. Wainwright (No.docxbudbarber38650
GIDEON V. WAINWRIGHT
372 U.S. 335
Gideon v. Wainwright (No. 155)
Argued: January 15, 1963
Decided: March 18, 1963
Reversed and cause remanded.
· Syllabus
· Opinion, Black
· Separate, Douglas
· Concurrence, Clark
· Concurrence, Harlan
Syllabus
Charged in a Florida State Court with a noncapital felony, petitioner appeared without funds and without counsel and asked the Court to appoint counsel for him, but this was denied on the ground that the state law permitted appointment of counsel for indigent defendants in capital cases only. Petitioner conducted his own defense about as well as could be expected of a layman, but he was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment. Subsequently, he applied to the State Supreme Court for a writ of habeas corpus, on the ground that his conviction violated his rights under the Federal Constitution. The State Supreme Court denied all relief.
Held: The right of an indigent defendant in a criminal trial to have the assistance of counsel is a fundamental right essential to a fair trial, and petitioner's trial and conviction without the assistance of counsel violated the Fourteenth Amendment. Betts v. Brady,316 U.S. 455, overruled. Pp. 336-345.
[p336]
TOP
Opinion
BLACK, J., Opinion of the Court
MR. JUSTICE BLACK delivered the opinion of the Court.
Petitioner was charged in a Florida state court with having broken and entered a poolroom with intent to commit a misdemeanor. This offense is a felony under [p337]Florida law. Appearing in court without funds and without a lawyer, petitioner asked the court to appoint counsel for him, whereupon the following colloquy took place:
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.
The DEFENDANT: The United States Supreme Court says I am entitled to be represented by Counsel.
Put to trial before a jury, Gideon conducted his defense about as well as could be expected from a layman. He made an opening statement to the jury, cross-examined the State's witnesses, presented witnesses in his own defense, declined to testify himself, and made a short argument "emphasizing his innocence to the charge contained in the Information filed in this case." The jury returned a verdict of guilty, and petitioner was sentenced to serve five years in the state prison. Later, petitioner filed in the Florida Supreme Court this habeas corpus petition attacking his conviction and sentence on the ground that the trial court's refusal to appoint counsel for him denied him rights "guaranteed by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights by the United States Government."[n1]Treating the petition for habeas corpus as properly before it, the State Supreme Court, "upon consideration thereof" but without an op.
Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into ConflictDan Kennedy
To accompany lecture on Sheppard v. Maxwell, Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart, and related cases on the clash between First and Sixth Amendment rights.
GIDEON V. WAINWRIGHT372 U.S. 335Gideon v. Wainwright (No.docxbudbarber38650
GIDEON V. WAINWRIGHT
372 U.S. 335
Gideon v. Wainwright (No. 155)
Argued: January 15, 1963
Decided: March 18, 1963
Reversed and cause remanded.
· Syllabus
· Opinion, Black
· Separate, Douglas
· Concurrence, Clark
· Concurrence, Harlan
Syllabus
Charged in a Florida State Court with a noncapital felony, petitioner appeared without funds and without counsel and asked the Court to appoint counsel for him, but this was denied on the ground that the state law permitted appointment of counsel for indigent defendants in capital cases only. Petitioner conducted his own defense about as well as could be expected of a layman, but he was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment. Subsequently, he applied to the State Supreme Court for a writ of habeas corpus, on the ground that his conviction violated his rights under the Federal Constitution. The State Supreme Court denied all relief.
Held: The right of an indigent defendant in a criminal trial to have the assistance of counsel is a fundamental right essential to a fair trial, and petitioner's trial and conviction without the assistance of counsel violated the Fourteenth Amendment. Betts v. Brady,316 U.S. 455, overruled. Pp. 336-345.
[p336]
TOP
Opinion
BLACK, J., Opinion of the Court
MR. JUSTICE BLACK delivered the opinion of the Court.
Petitioner was charged in a Florida state court with having broken and entered a poolroom with intent to commit a misdemeanor. This offense is a felony under [p337]Florida law. Appearing in court without funds and without a lawyer, petitioner asked the court to appoint counsel for him, whereupon the following colloquy took place:
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.
The DEFENDANT: The United States Supreme Court says I am entitled to be represented by Counsel.
Put to trial before a jury, Gideon conducted his defense about as well as could be expected from a layman. He made an opening statement to the jury, cross-examined the State's witnesses, presented witnesses in his own defense, declined to testify himself, and made a short argument "emphasizing his innocence to the charge contained in the Information filed in this case." The jury returned a verdict of guilty, and petitioner was sentenced to serve five years in the state prison. Later, petitioner filed in the Florida Supreme Court this habeas corpus petition attacking his conviction and sentence on the ground that the trial court's refusal to appoint counsel for him denied him rights "guaranteed by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights by the United States Government."[n1]Treating the petition for habeas corpus as properly before it, the State Supreme Court, "upon consideration thereof" but without an op.
Ethics and the impact of unconscious bias on investigations brandon l-blanken...Brandon L. Blankenship
Presented at the MCJEA 5th Annual Criminal Justice Investigator Seminar :Terrorism, Implicit Bias and De-escellation in Investigations
Brandon L. Blankenship serves as an assistant professor in the Department of Criminal Justice at the University of Alabama at Birmingham where he teaches law and ethics. He also is an instructor for continuing professional education including courses he designed such as Enemy in the Camp for attorneys and Forging Future Leaders: Restoring Classrooms and Communities for secondary educators. Brandon regularly writes on the legal services industry and multi-plaintiff litigation. He received his law degree from Thomas Goode Jones School of Law where he was a member of the Jones Law Review.
The second section on 14th Amendment looking at equal protection clause through Brown v. Board of Education (1). Discriminatory impact resulting from racial impact. Due process as expressed through right to privacy (body integrity) through Roe v. Wade. Right to live vs. right to die. Expansion of right to privacy through Obergefell.
The American Experiment to "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity" fleshing out through 14th Amendment, historical context, privileges and immunities clause, citizenship clause, equal protection clause, and due process clause. Illustrated through Gore v. Bush.
Illustrating the expansion of civil liberties from de jure to de facto protections. The distinction between civil rights and civil liberties. Case summaries illustrating facially neutral and constitutionally invalid holdings: Yick Wo v. Hopkins, Washington v. Davis, Bradley v. Pizzaco of Nebraska, Fitzpatrick v. City of Atlanta, and Gratz v. Bollinger.
Definition of Interpretivism in context of natural law (ius naturale, lex naturalis), legal positivism, the intersection of law, morality and ethics. The hermeneutic challenges caused by history, language and culture.
Considers the idea of personhood through the lens of Planned Parenthood vs. Casey. Quotes Supreme Court's mystery of life phrase. Family, parenthood and bodily integrity are fundamental rights under American Jurisprudence.
Expanding fundamental constitutional rights through the Fourteenth Amendment. The distinction between Dejure and De facto. The distinction between civil rights and civil liberties. Yick Wo v. Hopkins illustration of disparate impact of licensing laundries. Washington v. Davis illustration of disparate impact based on culturally biased employment application test. Bradley v. Pizzaco of Neb. illustration of disparate impact based on neutral requirement to be clean shaven. Gratz v. Bollinger illustration of disparate impact in college admission practices.
Protecting Defendants
UAB PSC 381 Bill of Rights
Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952)
Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966)
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965)
Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967)
Bowers v. Hardick
Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003)
Car Accident Injury Do I Have a Case....Knowyourright
Every year, thousands of Minnesotans are injured in car accidents. These injuries can be severe – even life-changing. Under Minnesota law, you can pursue compensation through a personal injury lawsuit.
A "File Trademark" is a legal term referring to the registration of a unique symbol, logo, or name used to identify and distinguish products or services. This process provides legal protection, granting exclusive rights to the trademark owner, and helps prevent unauthorized use by competitors.
Visit Now: https://www.tumblr.com/trademark-quick/751620857551634432/ensure-legal-protection-file-your-trademark-with?source=share
In 2020, the Ministry of Home Affairs established a committee led by Prof. (Dr.) Ranbir Singh, former Vice Chancellor of National Law University (NLU), Delhi. This committee was tasked with reviewing the three codes of criminal law. The primary objective of the committee was to propose comprehensive reforms to the country’s criminal laws in a manner that is both principled and effective.
The committee’s focus was on ensuring the safety and security of individuals, communities, and the nation as a whole. Throughout its deliberations, the committee aimed to uphold constitutional values such as justice, dignity, and the intrinsic value of each individual. Their goal was to recommend amendments to the criminal laws that align with these values and priorities.
Subsequently, in February, the committee successfully submitted its recommendations regarding amendments to the criminal law. These recommendations are intended to serve as a foundation for enhancing the current legal framework, promoting safety and security, and upholding the constitutional principles of justice, dignity, and the inherent worth of every individual.
ALL EYES ON RAFAH BUT WHY Explain more.pdf46adnanshahzad
All eyes on Rafah: But why?. The Rafah border crossing, a crucial point between Egypt and the Gaza Strip, often finds itself at the center of global attention. As we explore the significance of Rafah, we’ll uncover why all eyes are on Rafah and the complexities surrounding this pivotal region.
INTRODUCTION
What makes Rafah so significant that it captures global attention? The phrase ‘All eyes are on Rafah’ resonates not just with those in the region but with people worldwide who recognize its strategic, humanitarian, and political importance. In this guide, we will delve into the factors that make Rafah a focal point for international interest, examining its historical context, humanitarian challenges, and political dimensions.
Responsibilities of the office bearers while registering multi-state cooperat...Finlaw Consultancy Pvt Ltd
Introduction-
The process of register multi-state cooperative society in India is governed by the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002. This process requires the office bearers to undertake several crucial responsibilities to ensure compliance with legal and regulatory frameworks. The key office bearers typically include the President, Secretary, and Treasurer, along with other elected members of the managing committee. Their responsibilities encompass administrative, legal, and financial duties essential for the successful registration and operation of the society.
2. No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise
infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand
jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the
militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor
shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in
jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case
to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or
property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be
taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment V
3. ● No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise
infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a
grand jury…
● ...nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be
twice put in jeopardy of life or limb…
● ...nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness
against himself…
● ...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due
process of law….
Amendment V Summary
4. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a
speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district
wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall
have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the
nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the
witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining
witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for
his defense.
Amendment VI
5. ● … the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial,
by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime
shall have been committed…
● … which district shall have been previously ascertained by law…
● … and to be informed of the nature and cause of the
accusation…
● … to be confronted with the witnesses against him…
● to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his
favor…
● … and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Amendment VI Summary
6. ● Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines
imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment VIII
7. ● Excessive bail shall not be required…
● … nor excessive fines imposed …
● … nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment VIII Summary
11. Haywood Patterson Verdict Set Aside
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
(Let justice be done though it tear down heaven)
-Judge James Edwin Horton
12. Facts: Nine black youths -- described as, "young, ignorant, and
illiterate" -- were accused of raping two white women.
Alabama officials sprinted through the legal proceedings: a total of
three trials took one day and all nine were sentenced to death.
Alabama law required the appointment of counsel in capital cases,
but the attorneys did not consult with their clients and had done
little more than appear to represent them at the trial. This case was
decided together with Patterson v. Alabama and Weems v.
Alabama.
Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932)
13. Issue: Did the trials violate the Due Process Clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment?
Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932)
14. Holding: Yes. The Court held that the trials denied due process
because the defendants were not given reasonable time and
opportunity to secure counsel in their defense.
Though Justice George Sutherland did not rest the Court holding
on the right-to-counsel guarantee of the Sixth Amendment, he
repeatedly implicated that guarantee. This case was an early
example of national constitutional protection in the field of criminal
justice.
Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932)
16. 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.
-Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963)
17. Facts: Clarence Earl Gideon was charged in Florida state court with a
felony: having broken into and entered a poolroom with the intent to
commit a misdemeanor offense. When he appeared in court without a
lawyer, Gideon requested that the court appoint a lawyer for him.
According to Florida state law, however, an attorney may only be
appointed to an indigent defendant in capital cases, so the trial court
did not appoint one. Gideon represented himself in trial. He was found
guilty and sentenced to five years in prison. Gideon filed a habeas
corpus petition in the Florida Supreme Court and argued that the trial
court's decision violated his constitutional right to be represented by
counsel. The Florida Supreme Court denied habeas corpus relief.
Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963)
18. Issue: Does the Sixth Amendment's right to counsel in criminal cases
extend to felony defendants in state courts?
Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963)
19. Holding: Yes. Justice Hugo L. Black delivered the opinion of the 9-0
majority. The Supreme Court held that the framers of the Constitution
placed a high value on the right of the accused to have the means to
put up a proper defense, and the state as well as federal courts must
respect that right. The Court held that it was consistent with the
Constitution to require state courts to appoint attorneys for
defendants who could not afford to retain counsel on their own.
Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963)
20. Concurring Opinions:
● Protections extended to states by integration through due
process are not weaker than those applied to federal government.
● Right to counsel is a part of due process that should be
consistently applied.
● Existence of serious criminal charge is a special circumstance
that invokes the right to counsel (liberty of accused is at risk).
Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963)
21. Attributions:
Photograph of Gideon, State of Florida and CBS News.
For additional information:
Brandon L. Blankenship
UAB | Department of Government
(205)912-8248 | blbjd@uab.edu
Attributions and Additional Information:
