Gideon Vs Wainwright Research Paper
Socioeconomic Status and Sentencing – Is it Fair?
CRJU 354 – Corrections
Abstract
In 1963, the Supreme Court ruled in Gideon v. Wainwright that the Sixth Amendment guarantees every defendant, regardless of socioeconomic status, the right to an attorney and equal protection under the court of law. This means that an indigent defendant that cannot afford to hire a private attorney may have a public defender appointed to him or her. However, fifty years later, the promises of Gideon v. Wainwright may remain unfulfilled. Public defenders may not be able to provide the same treatment to their clients as a private attorney, resulting in harsher sentences being placed on indigent defendants. This is clearly not the equal treatment that Gideon sought, and it is rather evident that the public defender system is very flawed.
I. Introduction “You have the right to talk to a lawyer and have him present with …show more content…
Wainwright in 1963 was the landmark case that resulted in all criminal defendants given the right to have an attorney appointed to them at no monetary cost. Before Gideon v. Wainwright, poor defendants, or those from lower socioeconomic classes, were highly discriminated against, and not given a fair trial when compared to those from higher socioeconomic classes who could afford to hire their own lawyer.
Clarence Earl Gideon was a man charged with breaking and entering with the intent to commit a misdemeanor – a felony under Florida law. Gideon could not afford to hire a private attorney, and so requested one be appointed to him at his hearing. The judge denied the request, as at the time, only defendants charged with capital offenses were able to have court appointed attorneys. Therefore, Gideon was forced to represent himself in court and was found guilty, and sentenced with five years of imprisonment. Gideon filed a petition to the United States Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the
CRJU 354 – Corrections
Abstract
In 1963, the Supreme Court ruled in Gideon v. Wainwright that the Sixth Amendment guarantees every defendant, regardless of socioeconomic status, the right to an attorney and equal protection under the court of law. This means that an indigent defendant that cannot afford to hire a private attorney may have a public defender appointed to him or her. However, fifty years later, the promises of Gideon v. Wainwright may remain unfulfilled. Public defenders may not be able to provide the same treatment to their clients as a private attorney, resulting in harsher sentences being placed on indigent defendants. This is clearly not the equal treatment that Gideon sought, and it is rather evident that the public defender system is very flawed.
I. Introduction “You have the right to talk to a lawyer and have him present with …show more content…
Wainwright in 1963 was the landmark case that resulted in all criminal defendants given the right to have an attorney appointed to them at no monetary cost. Before Gideon v. Wainwright, poor defendants, or those from lower socioeconomic classes, were highly discriminated against, and not given a fair trial when compared to those from higher socioeconomic classes who could afford to hire their own lawyer.
Clarence Earl Gideon was a man charged with breaking and entering with the intent to commit a misdemeanor – a felony under Florida law. Gideon could not afford to hire a private attorney, and so requested one be appointed to him at his hearing. The judge denied the request, as at the time, only defendants charged with capital offenses were able to have court appointed attorneys. Therefore, Gideon was forced to represent himself in court and was found guilty, and sentenced with five years of imprisonment. Gideon filed a petition to the United States Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the