Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

Read a random definition: orderly officer

A quick definition of Gideon v. Wainwright (1963):

Gideon v. Wainwright was a court case in the United States that said everyone, even people who can't afford a lawyer, have the right to a lawyer in criminal cases. This means that if someone is accused of a crime and can't afford a lawyer, the government has to provide one for them. This is important because it helps make sure that everyone gets a fair trial. The court case also said that this right applies to all states in the United States.

A more thorough explanation:

Gideon v. Wainwright is a famous court case in the United States that happened in 1963. The case was about a man named Clarence Earl Gideon who was accused of breaking into a pool hall in Florida. Gideon was too poor to afford a lawyer, so he had to represent himself in court. He was found guilty and sentenced to five years in prison.

However, Gideon believed that he had the right to a lawyer, even if he couldn't afford one. He appealed his case all the way to the Supreme Court, which is the highest court in the United States. The Supreme Court agreed to hear his case and ultimately ruled in his favor.

The Supreme Court used the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to extend the constitutional right to an attorney in federal criminal cases for those who could not afford representation to indigent defendants in state prosecutions. This means that if you are accused of a crime and you can't afford a lawyer, the government has to provide one for you.

For example, if someone is arrested for a crime and they can't afford a lawyer, the government will provide a public defender to represent them in court. This ensures that everyone has access to legal representation, regardless of their financial situation.

The ruling greatly increased the use of public defenders, who are lawyers that work for the government and represent people who can't afford their own lawyer. The Supreme Court held that the right of an indigent defendant to appointed counsel is a fundamental right, essential to a fair trial and denial of such a right would be in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Through this case, the Supreme Court overruled its earlier decision in Betts v. Brady which denied counsel to indigent defendants when prosecuted by a state. This means that even if you are being prosecuted by a state government, you still have the right to a lawyer if you can't afford one.

In 2002, the Supreme Court extended the rule and held that the right applied in all cases where jail time is a possible punishment. This means that even if you are facing a minor crime, like a traffic violation, if jail time is a possible punishment, you still have the right to a lawyer if you can't afford one.

Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) | gift

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
WASP HAHAHAHAHHA
texaslawhopefully
17:08
Estimates are about 4k fruitbat
YRDSL
17:08
im a 1 issue voter - if i want someone to be elected i vote for them
woof
texaslawhopefully
17:08
I've seen some that could be as high as 7k though
17:08
@jackfrost11770: ya prolly don't buy any lotto tickets tonite
get on that trump coin before the rug pull lol
Dkk
17:09
@BigStrongBug: I don't consider myself a one issue voter but if I had to pick one it would be gender relations.
i am a one issue voter for the economy, which is why i voted harris
texaslawhopefully
17:10
Here's a fairly well respected estimate fruitybat: The proposed tariffs could cost consumers an additional $2,500 to $7,600 a year per household, according to estimates, said Jonathan Gold, vice president of supply chain and customs policy for the National Retail Federation.
i am a voter so i voted
17:11
Lol what does gender relations mean
17:11
Like are you anti gay marriage?
texaslawhopefully
17:11
@Dkk: So you care about gender relations over the Constitution, institutional stability, the economy, political norms, etc.?
blue collar trump voters are gonna blame anything but him anyway when the price of their household consumption goes through the roof. I wonder how they'll spin that narrative.
17:11
Or are you an all inclusive hater and include trans folks too
texaslawhopefully
17:12
Even if you have conservative social values you still shouldn't like Trump lol, but that's a whole diff convo
I love when people prefer putting not talking about gender in schools at the top of the agenda instead of dealing with school shootings
this is going to blow your mind but once you realize women and men are more similar than different you will drown in pussy or dick
17:12
@HopefullyInLawSchool: $45k @ KS is really good. $145k is to attend it is not a bad deal
facts knowledgeable
Also love how he put an EO to leave the Paris climate agreement in the midst of the LA wildfires and places who haven’t gotten snow in 15 years now getting storms
@llama: it would only be 17,000 ish per year
17:15
yeah and i think after 1L u get in state? not certain
I dont think so based on my very brief research
17:16
hmm I know some school offer that in their offer (I also believe KS does not negotiate) but I wonder which schools would reconsider with a condition of in state after 1L yr?
Dkk
17:17
@texaslawhopefully: Not necessarily but I believe what Aristotle used to say. He used to say you could not have a functioning political system if you can not get gender relations right. Or essentially that.
KS does negotiate! I got an email saying theyre doing it for the first time this year
its rather limited but its not nothing
17:18
@HopefullyInLawSchool: noted, thanks for the intel. I know we joke around but all things conidered, KS is goated
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.