GIDEON V. WAINWRIGHT.

GIDEON V. WAINWRIGHT. In Powell v. Alabama (1932) the U. S. Supreme Court held that state prosecution of indigent defendants for a capital crime without effective appointment of defense counsel violated the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. But in Betts v. Brady (1942) the Court declined to compel the states to provide counsel in noncapital cases without "special circumstances" that would render a trial without counsel "fundamentally unfair." In 1962, the year Clarence Earl Gideon was prosecuted for burglary in a Florida state court, about a dozen states, including Florida, failed to meet the minimum constitutional requirements of Betts. Gideon was forced to defend himself and was convicted, despite his insistence at trial that "the U. S. Supreme Court says I am entitled to counsel." A year later, in Gideon v. Wainwright (372 U. S. 335), the Supreme Court agreed with him. Overruling Betts, it held that at least in all felony cases "any person …too poor to hire a lawyer cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him."

The political reaction to Gideon was generally favorable. Many states implemented the decision by establishing public defender systems or greatly expanding existing ones. The limitation of Gideon to felony cases was rejected in 1972, when the Supreme Court held that no person may be imprisoned for any offense without representation by counsel (Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U. S. 25, 37).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Beaney, William Merritt. The Right to Counsel in American Courts. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1955.

Lewis, Anthony. Gideon's Trumpet. New York: Random House, 1964.

YaleKamisar/a. r.

See alsoBill of Rights in U. S. Constitution ; Constitution of the United States ; Due Process of Law ; Judicial Review ; Supreme Court .