Gideon Vs. Wainwright

Want to read the rest of this paper? Join Essayworld today to view this entire essay and over 50,000 other term papers

it had held, did not guarantee free counsel to all felony defendants that are unable to retain their own. Since1942, when Betts v. Brady was decided by a divided Court, the problem of defendant’s federal constitutional right to counsel in a state court has been a continuing source of controversy and litigation in both state and federal courts. Since Gideon was proceeding without funds, it gave the Justice a chance to think about the constitution. He appointed a counsel to represent him and requested both sides to discuss in their briefs and oral arguments. Should this Court’s holding in Betts v. Brady be reconsidered?”
PRECEDENTS
The Supreme Court first dealt with the issue in 1932, in the Scottsboro Case, POWELL v. ALABAMA. DUE PROCESS OF LAW required al least a “hearing,” Justice GEORGE H. SUTHERLAND said, and the presence of the counsel was “fundamental” to a meaningful hearing.
However, Sutherland said that the Court was not deciding whether poor defendants had a right ...

Get instant access to over 50,000 essays. Write better papers. Get better grades. Already a member? Login

CITE THIS PAGE: