Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

Read a random definition: qualifying share

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
HopefullyInLawSchool
16:06
it means you will not be rejected today and may be accepted or WL in the future
Just got my Michigan rejection
BookwormBroker
16:10
same
RoaldDahl
16:10
@HopefullyInLawSchool: what if i already got rejected. does it mean anything
HopefullyInLawSchool
16:12
@RoaldDahl: Likely not however it could mean nothing
RoaldDahl
16:15
So if it means nothing does that mean something?
HopefullyInLawSchool
16:17
Possibly
RoaldDahl
16:26
Cool
RoaldDahl
16:26
thank you!!!! i hope it means something
pinkandblue
16:31
fart
IrishDinosaur
16:36
Mich R gang lesgooo
Did anyone else get that random get to know nova email?
HopefullyInLawSchool
17:21
Ya it was sent to all YM applicants
starfishies
17:37
Anyone get the NDLS email inviting you to apply for something even though they haven’t made a decision on your app yet
17:38
Better yet I got the email and I was rejected last month
starfishies
17:38
Wtf
starfishies
17:39
and the deadline is in like a week what is this
any cardozo movement?
BatmanBeyond
18:01
Sent a LOCI via portal, but I'm wondering if email would have gotten me a swifter response
BatmanBeyond
18:02
This whole hold/wait-list/reserve system is a headache
loci already?
BatmanBeyond
18:09
If the odds are like 1-2% I don't think it matters much by the numbers
12:11
I got the same NDLS email
OrangeThing
12:18
I think the user profiles are broken
19:29
Any word out of Notre Dame?
19:29
Only the invitation to apply for LSE
19:29
Anyone received a decision from NDLS?
19:50
when did u guys apply that just heard from umich? they havent even glanced at my app yet
0:30
how am i supposed to spy on people when profile links are broken?
Right. Broken links smh
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.