1. Describe your overall impression of the movie and its relevance to a topic or topics we covered and discussed in class. After watching this movie, I think the right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment of Constitution is as basic as any right listed in the American Constitution, because the threat of imprisonment or even execution is greater than any other threats. Without this fundament right, most of criminal defendants will not have a fair trial and equal protection of the laws, which further violates the defendant’s constitutional right that is protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, just like Gideon. He was charged of breaking and entering a Florida pool hall and stealing money and some beer and coke. Gideon requested the state of Florida to appoint a counsel to defend him, but the judge denied his request because it was not a capital case meaning crimes may be warranted the death penalty. Thus Gideon was forced to defend himself against the prosecutor who was a well trained lawyer. An old man who quit school after the eighth grade versus a lawyer, Gideon was found guilty unsurprisingly, and he was …show more content…
He asserted that Gideon should had been entitled to having a defense lawyer regardless of special circumstances, because no man can have a fair trial without a lawyer. In order to have an equal protection of the laws, the requirement of the right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment should be imposed to every state. To be more specific, either the state court or the federal court should provide a defendant with a lawyer at least from the defendant’s the first arraignment through the trial and appeal. This right should be applicable to all criminal offenses but misdemeanors, thereby the right to counsel was guaranteed for both the poor and the rich. Basically, Abe Fortas indicated that this right was supposed to be a fundamental
After Florida denied his petition, Gideon appealed to the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court reviewed his case in 1963 and a unanimous decision was announced by Justice Hugo Black. The Supreme Court ruled Gideon’s conviction unconstitutional because he was denied a defense lawyer. Once the Supreme Court ruled that each state is required to provide defense attorneys to any criminal defendants charged with a felony, Gideon was retried and acquitted on all charges. The Gideon v. Wainwright case not only helped to free 2,000 individuals in Florida, but also helped many individuals without sufficient funds in the United States, as Gideon’s outspoken stance ensured them the right to counsel.
He then went on to write to the United States Supreme Court, saying he had been denied counsel and his Sixth Amendment rights had been violated. The United States Supreme Court took his petition, and their decision was announced on March 18, 1963 that they ruled unanimously in favor of Gideon. Due to Gideon’s appeal,numerous other defendants were found to have had their Civil Rights violated. About 2000 individuals that had been convicted were freed in Florida alone as a result of the decision. Gideon’s case had another trial and he was acquitted and went on to resume his previous life.
As the trial came to a close end the jury announced that Clarence Earl Gideon was guilty, and was convicted five years in prison. While being in jail Gideon filed a petition before the Florida Supreme Court declaring that the State of Florida had proclaimed an unfair case trial by denying him his Sixth Amendment the Right to the Assistance of Counsel. The petition sent to the Supreme Court was denied. Next, Gideon did not fall back; he appealed his case to the U.S Supreme Court claiming that putting him on trial without a lawyer was unfair due to the fact that it denied him due process of law against the 14th Amendment. The U.S Supreme Court came to a conclusion to review Gideon’s case, which
Clarence Earl Gideon is a simple 8th grade education type of man, who lives in a hotel across the street of a pool bar place in the state of Florida. One day after getting a taxi to go to a bar, Mr. Gideon was falsely accused of breaking into the pool bar and stealing some money. The police picked Clarence up and brought him to court. The day of the court trial, Mr. Gideon had brought up the Constitutional issue of Amendment 6, which is to give the defendant an attorney.
Before his trial Clarence Gideon requested an attorney to represent him in court because he was aware of his sixth amendment rights but, he was denied the possibility of being properly represented in court due to the fact that he was not facing charges that would warrant the death penalty (Oyez). This practice is recognized as unjust and unconstitutional but was once seen as normal in Floridian court systems. It would be virtually impossible to represent oneself in court because it is almost impossible to know every law and therefore substantially harder to not self-incriminate. The judicial system is built on the principles of justice and fairness. One can easily see how the odds were stacked against Gideon and thus proving how it was unjust for him to go into a trial so grossly unprepared on how to defend himself.
Winston Vazquez III: 6th Amendment Clarence Earl Gideon was a drifter who was very poor and had only an eighth-grade education. On the third day of June 1961, Gideon was charged and then arrested for stealing fifty dollars and a couple of drinks from the Pool House, which was a pool hall/bar. When Gideon was tried in court, he made a request for a lawyer because he did not have enough money to afford one. When Gideon requested a lawyer, he was denied by judge Henry Grady Cochran, who retired during the case and was replaced by Louie Lee Wainwright.
It is well understood in today’s society that every person charged with a crime is entitled to the counsel of an attorney, regardless if the defendant can afford an attorney or not. Prior to the landmark decision of Gideon v Wainwright (1963), indigent defendants charged in state courts were not guaranteed the right to counsel. The Gideon case extended the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution’s right to counsel in federal trials, though incorporation by the Fourteenth Amendment, to apply to all states. Justice Black wrote the opinion for the Supreme Court in Gideon and opined that “The right of one charged with a crime to counsel may not be deemed fundamental and essential to fair trials in some countries, but it is in ours” (Gideon
The central issue being looked at is the 6th Amendment, which is the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses. The point of the 6th Amendment Confrontation Clause is to give the defendant more rights at trial. These rights include, the right to confront their accuser and the witness that are against them. The 6th Amendment also establishes the guidelines for out-of-court
Despite the unwavering dedication of Atticus Finch in “To Kill a Mockingbird”, the absence of evidence, and a moving courtroom speech, Tom Robinson is convicted of a crime that he did not commit. This jury ruling causes both those who advocated Robinson’s conviction and those who were convinced of his innocence to question their notions of justice and fairness. As if a false conviction was not enough, Tom is eventually killed, and the sense of justice and fairness seem to be completely violated. Write an argumentative essay on “To Kill a Mockingbird” in which you establish what Lee is trying to convey regarding these two concepts that are so important to civil society. Questions that you might want to consider include: If justice and
In the first part of the film that I found interesting was Separate but equal thinking in America. Brown v. Board of Education was the architect in launching the modern Civil Rights Movement. Brown vs. Board of Education reputed the “Separate but equal” thinking in America. The Supreme Court controversial ruling stated that separate educational facilities were inherently unequal and that segregation was unconstitutional. (Let Freedom Ring)
Despite strong evidence in Tom's favor, the deeply ingrained prejudice against Black people results in an unfair conviction. Lee utilizes this trial to highlight the weaknesses in the legal system as well as the systemic racial discrimination that exists in the South.
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.
Even though it’s nonfiction, it reads much like a fiction novel would, getting comparisons to ¬To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee. What makes it even more compelling than the fictional novel is that these are the stories of real people, of those wrongly convicted or unfairly sentenced. Stevenson’s memoir truly shows the power of mercy and what it can do for those wronged by judiciaries. This book’s story of justice and redemption and Stevenson’s struggle to free convicts from unjust or excessive punishment is deeply moving and powerful. The reader will root for him as he struggles to do as much as he can for the accused.
6th Amendment I personally find that out of all the amendments the most important one is the 6th amendment. Reason being that it is crucial in aiding the judicial process from wrongly persecuting innocent people and it allows our democratic process to continue without preventing innocent people for taking the fall while punishing those who harm it. It keeps justice in check, keeping laws in line and rulings to be fair. The 6th amendment helps the defendants have an attorney when they are unable to afford one.
As can be seen, Lee’s usage of Tom Robinson’s trial and the racial discrimination and prejudice seen throughout it helps reinforce the theme of social injustice throughout To Kill A Mockingbird. Another encounter that the