Connection lost
Server error
Gideon v. Wainwright Case Brief
Audio Insights: Learn Cases on The Go
Transform downtime into productive study time with our premium audio insights. Perfect for commutes, workouts, or visual breaks from reading.
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: Indigent defendant Clarence Gideon was denied court-appointed counsel in a Florida felony trial. The Supreme Court held this violated his Sixth Amendment right to counsel, made applicable to states through the Fourteenth Amendment, guaranteeing counsel in state felony cases.
Legal Significance: Established the fundamental right of indigent defendants to appointed counsel in state felony prosecutions, incorporating the Sixth Amendment’s right to counsel into the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause and overruling Betts v. Brady.
Gideon v. Wainwright Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Clarence Earl Gideon was charged in a Florida state court with felony breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor. Appearing in court without funds and without a lawyer, Gideon requested the court to appoint counsel for him. The trial judge denied the request, stating that under Florida law, counsel could only be appointed for an indigent defendant in a capital case. Gideon conducted his own defense, was convicted by a jury, and sentenced to five years in prison. He subsequently filed a habeas corpus petition in the Florida Supreme Court, alleging that the trial court’s refusal to appoint counsel violated his rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. The Florida Supreme Court denied all relief without an opinion. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to reconsider its prior holding in Betts v. Brady, 316 U.S. 455 (1942), which held that the refusal to appoint counsel for an indigent defendant in a state felony trial did not invariably violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the Sixth Amendment’s right to the assistance of counsel, as applied to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, require states to provide counsel to indigent defendants in all felony criminal prosecutions?
Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Florida Supreme Court, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id es
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does the Sixth Amendment’s right to the assistance of counsel, as applied to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, require states to provide counsel to indigent defendants in all felony criminal prosecutions?
Conclusion
This landmark decision established an indigent defendant's absolute right to appointed counsel Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim ven
Legal Rule
The Sixth Amendment's guarantee of a right to assistance of counsel is Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in
Legal Analysis
The Court, in an opinion by Justice Black, explicitly overruled *Betts v. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud e
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The Court overruled Betts v. Brady. - The Sixth Amendment’s right