The Gideon V. Wainwright Case

Clarence Earl Gideon was not someone you would expect to be a hero. According to www.uscourts.gov, he left school after the 8th grade and decided to run away from home. “He was mostly a drifter, spending time in and out of prison for nonviolent crimes,” their website reads. When he was 51 years old, he was accused of breaking into a bar in Florida and arrested. He was too poor to afford a lawyer, so when he got to court, he asked the judge to appoint him one, according to his rights under the Sixth Amendment. The judge refused, and he had to represent himself. “He made an opening statement to the jury, cross-examined the prosecution 's witnesses, brought witnesses in his own defense, declined to testify himself, and made arguments emphasizing

The case Furman v Georgia made it all the to the supreme court because it would affect the way the whole country delivered punishment. Although it surprised many people that it made it that far because most people were for capital punishment. Michael Meltsner said,”Georgia was a shock. Before LDF's anti-capital punishment campaign, there had been no successful court challenge of the death penalty — even when it had been handed down in a blatantly racist or totally arbitrary manner” (www.michealmeltsner.com/interview.html). .

This was based on the “due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment” in the US Constitution. “The Supreme Court ruling said that Council was ‘ fundamental’ to due process in cases of this seriousness, whether in a state or federal court.” This decision had a major impact on the American system of laws. For the first time, the right to counsel was established for state and federal courts. However, Alabama decided to be a sore loser and re-prosecuted the Scottsboro case even though there was enough evidence to dismiss the case.

Prior to the case of Gideon v. Wainwright, defendant Clarence Earl Gideon was charged with breaking and entering in the state of Florida. This crime is a felony according to Florida state law. Unable to pay for defense counsel, Gideon requested that the court grant him one for free. The court denied Gideon his request of being granted defense counsel. The court stated, “Under the laws of the State of Florida, the only time the Court can appoint Counsel to represent a Defendant is when that person charged with a capital offense.” As a result of this denial of defense counsel, Gideon was forced to defend himself and did not succeed in doing an adequate job.

The Sixth Amendment of the U. S. Constitution, the Speedy Trial Act of 1974 and the states’ constitutional or statutory provisions establish the right to a speedy trial of criminal defendants. In particular, the 6th Amendment’s Clause states that “in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial” (Susskind, 1993).While the U. S. Constitution does not provide a precise frame of time, states’ laws specify the time within which prosecution must try a defendant. However, the computations are so complex that cases are rarely dismissed on the ground of violation of the speedy trial right (Shestokas, 2014). In fact, ironically defendants have to demand a speedy trial for these time periods to run and their

The Supreme Court ruled that it did not violate the eighth amendment and was constitutional. This brings up the question “Was the case properly determined by the Supreme Court or should it be Congress to decide?” Furman v. Georgia (1972) was a case similar to Gregg’s. A man was convicted of murder and burglary. He has sentenced the death penalty.

The case of Florida versus Jardines was heard before the Supreme Court on October 31, 2012 and a decision was made on March 26, 2013. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Jardines. This case challenged the fundamental core of the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable search and seizure. The ruling of this case has impacted how law officials handle searches and the use of drug dogs. This case also challenged the boundary line of where personal property starts.

Plessy v Fergusen was yet another court case where “separate but equal” was not implementing equality. It showed that they still thought of Black men and women as being less and not deserving the same rights as the White men. Homer Plessy was a free man, that was mainly White and because of a percentage he had of being Black he was treated as a Black man. He tried to sit in the train car of the White men and much like Rosa Parks was asked to go to the back where the Black men belonged in a different car. This case resulted in the Supreme Court defending the decision of the East Louisiana Railroad stating that they weren't violating any law by the ruling they had. This court case showed that even if Plessy was a part White because he was a part

Each State conducts its own criminal justice system, separate from federal authority, under the reserved powers of the Constitution. Alabama has its own bill of rights that recognizes the right of the accused to obtain counsel, but does not require the State to pay for attorneys to defend accused persons.” As for Powell the argument stated was this, “The young black men 's right to counsel was so fundamental to criminal proceedings that any trial conducted without a defense attorney was not a fair trial at all. Alabama 's conduct of the trial was unfair—a violation of a basic rule of decency and justice under the Constitution.” These two vastly different arguments made it rather challenging for the Supreme court to make a decision that was not favoring one side.

Plessy vs. Ferguson, one of the bigger cases in the turning point for rights, gave the black community a big boost forward. There was a man named Homer Adoph Plessy that had a problem with the way things were going at the time and he wanted equal rights. But there was another man named John Ferguson who thought that everything was just skippy. They went to court to settle their quarrel.

The government appealed the court of appeals decision to bring to the Supreme Court where it is now. I stand with full belief, and the majority opinion of the Supreme Court that Abel Fields’ conviction be overturned. His First Amendment rights had been violated. Even though he was

The problem arose when the police officers said they had not advised Miranda of his right to an attorney. Miranda’s lawyer was concerned that his Sixth Amendment Right had been violated. This case was noticed by the ACLU and was taken to the Supreme Court. This case raised issues within the Supreme Court on the rights of Criminal Defendants.

This system is put into place to be fair to those accused. There are many cases in which the due process was not followed and the case was considered unfair and thrown out. Ex: Gideon v. Wainwright (1963). Clarence Gideon was accused of burglary and while in court he asked for an attorney to be appointed to his case because he could not afford one, but he was denied. At the time attorneys were only appointed to those who were poor, but who is to say whether or not a person is not poor enough to get an attorney appointed to them.

The case Howes v. Fields was involved with the Miranda rights. The case is about an inmate´s confession about a sex crime without having the police officers questioning him telling him his Miranda rights. Mr. Fields had been brought to the jail of Michigan because of disorderly conduct. While being in jail Mr. Fields had been questioned by the police for several hours about the disorderly conduct. He was not told his Miranda rights, but he was told he was free to go back to his cell whenever he wanted too.

Ferguson. Plessy v. Ferguson is known as the case that put Jim Crow laws on the map and with is an era of discrimination and segregation in the United States. The case was brought to the Supreme Court in 1896, Mr.Plessy was a man from Louisiana who went on a train and took an empty seat where white people were normally accommodated , the interesting tidbit was that the rail line had no policy of distinguishing passengers based off of race or ethnicity. However a conductor of the train went up to Mr. Plessy and told him to move with the threat of ejection and or imprisonment. After refusing to move from his seat he was arrested and was taken to court to talk of issues regarding racial mixing