Why You Get a Lawyer If You Can't Afford One | Gideon v. Wainwright
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 май 2017
- I wrote a new book all about the Supreme Court. Order your copy here: amzn.to/45Wzhur
Patreon: / iammrbeat
Mr. Beat's band: electricneedleroom.net/
Mr. Beat on Twitter: / beatmastermatt
In episode 9 of Supreme Court Briefs, a man can't afford a lawyer, struggles to defend himself in court, gets convicted of a crime he didn't commit, writes a letter, and everything turns out all groovy.
Check out cool primary sources here:
www.oyez.org/cases/1962/155
Additional sources used:
www.uscourts.gov/educational-r...
www.justice.gov/atj/legacy-gi...
sixthamendment.org/the-right-t...
www.cbsnews.com/news/gideon-v-...
Reading Through History: The Great Supreme Court Cases
Panama City, Florida
June 3, 1961
Sometime between midnight and 8am, someone breaks into the Bay Harbor Poolroom and steals money from a cash register. One witness reported that they had seen a man named Clarence Earl Gideon walk out of the poolroom at around 5:30 that morning, walking out with a wine bottle and his pockets filled with wads of cash. Gideon, a drifter who spent most of his adult life in and out of different prisons for nonviolent crimes, was an easy target. Police arrested him for breaking and entering and trying to steal.
Well as it turns out, Gideon had no money. Because he couldn’t afford a lawyer, he asked a Florida Circuit Court judge to appoint one for him, claiming the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution guarantees everyone a lawyer. The judge was like, “sorry dude,” and denied his request. Florida law only allowed the court to provide a lawyer if the defendant was charged with a capital offense, or one so serious that death might be the punishment.
And so, Gideon was left to represent himself, and most say he didn’t do that good of a job defending himself. The court found him guilty of the accused crimes and sentenced him to five years in prison. While serving his sentence in a Florida state prison, Gideon began to teach himself law, which made even more confident that his rights were being violated when the Florida Circuit Court refused to provide a lawyer for him. From his prison cell, he hand wrote a letter directly to the Supreme Court. Not only did the Supreme Court actually read his petition, they agreed to actually hear his case.
Gideon’s lawsuit specifically went against the Secretary of the Florida Department of Corrections, who was a dude named H.G. Cochran. However, Cochran went up and done retired, and was replaced by another dude named Louie Wainwright. So Gideon was suing Wainwright. Get it? Gideon v. Wainwright?
Anyway, the Supreme Court was being all nice and assigned Gideon a well established Washington, D.C. lawyer and future Supreme Court justice named Abe Fortas to represent him. As it turns out, the Supreme Court had been waiting for this opportunity. Back in 1932, in Powell v. Alabama, the Court had decided that people accused of crimes should both be notified that they have the right to a lawyer and should be provided one if they can’t afford one. However, this only applied to capital offenses.
And then, ten years later, the Court decided in Betts v. Brady that, unless there were special circumstances, people didn’t have to have a lawyer provided for them by the state.
Well, with Gideon, the Court said THE HECK WITH YOU BETTS. No, not Mr. Betts. Betts v. Brady. They overturned Betts v. Brady.
On March 18, 1963, the Court announced unanimously, in favor of Gideon. It argued that the Sixth Amendment doesn’t point out a difference between capital and noncapital cases. It also said the 14th amendment gave the federal government authority to control state laws that denied 6th amendment rights.
The decision did not free Gideon from prison. Rather, he got a new trial with a new lawyer provided by the government of Florida. The new trial took place August 5, 1963, five months after the Supreme Court. His new lawyer completely discredited the original case against Gideon. The jury found Gideon not guilty after just one hour of deliberation. Gideon was free.
Gideon v. Wainwright further protected the rights of the accused, which the Warren Court would also do again three years later with the Miranda v. Arizona decision. Hey check out that episode if you haven’t already. The decision also greatly expanded the power of the 14th amendment, protecting individual rights against both federal and state laws that threatened them. Sadly, today many states do not provide adequate funding for their public defender systems. As matter of fact, the state of Missouri was recently sued due to this.
![DRAGON BALL: Sparking! ZERO - Master and Apprentice Trailer [BUDOKAI TENKAICHI Series]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wNf7A4rHczc/mqdefault.jpg)
My book about everything you need to know about the Supreme Court is now available!
Amazon: amzn.to/3Jj3ZnS
Bookshop (a collection of indie publishers): bookshop.org/books/the-power-of-and-frustration-with-our-supreme-court-100-supreme-court-cases-you-should-know-about-with-mr-beat/9781684810680
Barnes and Noble: www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-matt-beat/1142323504?ean=9781684810680
Amazon UK: www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=the+power+of+our+supreme+court&crid=3R59T7TQ6WKI3&sprefix=the+power+of+our+supreme+courth%2Caps%2C381&ref=nb_sb_noss
Mango: mango.bz/books/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-2523-b
Target: www.target.com/p/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-paperback/-/A-86273023
Walmart: www.walmart.com/ip/The-Power-of-Our-Supreme-Court-How-the-Supreme-Court-Cases-Shape-Democracy-Paperback-9781684810680/688487495
Chapters Indigo: www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/the-power-of-our-supreme/9781684810680-item.html?ikwid=The+Power+of+Our+Supreme+Court&ikwsec=Home&ikwidx=0#algoliaQueryId=eab3e89ad34051a62471614d72966b7e
mans taught himself law from prison what a LEGEND
The original Florida man who got arrested for something silly and ended up a hero
Lots of inmates do this. They have lots of free time, lots of access to books, and lots of personal motivation to understand the laws that apply to their case.
@@BradyPostma sad that it has to be said but inmates are people too. As long as they arent hardened rapists, murders, or anything like that our focus should be on rehabilitation
@@Spongebrain97 Why should it ever been anything but rehabilitation? What good does it do to be vengeful when rehabilitation is clearly more effective and the damage has already been done?
@@JUNGLEsausage yeah, even “hardened” rapists and murderers deserve rehabilitation or at least a serious attempt at it
good thing Gideon stepped up for his rights.
excellent video
Thank you! Agreed!
Unanimous decision.
@Max Bowen I was taught in class about this man but I feel like most people wouldn't remember him. His name should grow as yes he stood up for all of our rights
@@iammrbeatDanke, einverstanden!
I'm floored. It is AMAZING that his petition to the US Supreme Court was 5 SIMPLE HANDWRITTEN PAGES! I read the petition online and I'm breathless of how something simple as that got a response. And they responded which the judgement affects all criminal cases.
"I believe that each era finds an improvement in law for the betterment of mankind" That's so true. Even when it seems like it's going backwards, it's going forward.
I am a lawyer. I received a J.D. degree from Stetson University College of Law, in St. Petersburg, Florida, in 1981. The year after I graduated, Bruce Jacob became Dean of the College of Law. Who was he? He argued the case in the Supreme Court on behalf of Wainwright. If you get a chance, read the transcript. It is such a poor argument that the Supreme Court had no choice but to rule in Gideon's favor. The really odd thing is that, nowadays, Jacob claims credit for securing representation for the indigent.
1 year late but I mean , if did such a terrible job that his loss resulted in the public defender system being created... Well he's sort of right surely
@@ricky5058 The defendant may be guilty of murder, but in what degree? He is entitled to competent advocacy on that question, as it literally mean the difference between life and death. Also, arguing the penalty phase of the trial correctly requires showing that the aggravating circumstances are outweighed by the mitigating circumstances.
A classic example of “defending the guilty” occurred when Clarence Darrow defended Leopold and Loeb in the 1920s. There was no doubt that they were guilty. So, he insisted that they plead guilty. Why? Because if they entered a plea of not guilty, or even not guilty by reason of insanity, the State of Illinois would be entitled to a jury trial. Under Illinois law at the time, the jury fixed the punishment, and it is virtually certain that a jury would have sentenced them to death by hanging. If they entered a plea of guilty, the question of sentence would be determined by the judge without a jury. As a matter of human nature, Darrow knew that forcing one person to make than decision, as opposed to twelve relative anonymous people on the jury, would make a death sentence less likely. He was correct. They were sentenced to life imprisonment (for the murder) and ninety-nine years (for the kidnapping), to run consecutively.
Loeb died in prison. Leopold was paroled in 1958 and died in 1971.
Are you also a shirtless lawyer?
@@TheJingles007 Not in court or meeting with clients or others. On telephonic conferences without video sometimes.
lol
Has the education system changed since you got into it? Has RUclips changed since you got into it?
Congrats on 10k!
Thanks...I'm not there yet though! And thanks for the great questions.
The Supreme Court knows better than to mess with me.
The whole series help me with my summer homework! Thanks!
Glad they helped!
" I'll be in the cold cold ground before I recognize Missura" -Abe Simpson
Mr. Beat, thank you for these Supreme Court videos. They are a great resource for my students. I hope my videos are half as helpful as yours!
Thanks for watching and sharing. I'll be sure to check out your stuff!
i usually hate history and government. But i really learn so much from your videos AND the little extra details (like the grave) make me really appreciate these cases as real people and i am really enjoying the subjects now. THANK YOU FOR BEING YOU!!!!!
in my first law class I grumped at the instructor that he was choosing books that got too dense and this turned into a bit of a hot argument in the middle of class, with the instructor insisting that law is complicated and requires complicated language, and one classmate barking at me to shut up for arguing otherwise! Well, what marvelous proof of my case I have found by stumbling across this video! Thanks!
Thank you for your videos! I watch them a lot for my class assignments. They are very very interesting & helpful.
Love this story. Reading about this case in 'Gideon's Trumpet' in my freshman year of college was an eye-opener.
This video was very helpful for my project thank you very much. You explain it so well while other articles are very hard to understand!
That’s a good episode. It shows that now matter how low your low in life might be, you too can have an impact in the country’s course...
Chief Justice: Earl Warren
President During this time: John F. Kennedy
Argued January 15, 1963
Decided March 18, 1963
Case Duration: 62 days
Decision: 9-0 in favor of Gideon
"10k subscribers"
I would say your channel has grown a fair bit in the last three plus years, and since I've found it recently, I'm happy to say I'm one of now over 212k subscribers.
Well done, Mr. Beat!
Gidden looks so sad in that picture you picked I felt so bad for him
Hey everyone. Please post your questions for my upcoming 10,000 K subscriber special. I will answer them in that video. Thanks :)
Who is your favorite POTUS?
Your explanations are awesome 👏
Can you explain Ling Lin v Mukasey 7 15 2008 286 Fed.appx 871 2008 el 2740473
I want someone to address this. www.vice.com/en/article/wjeeyx/grover-cleveland-a-rapist-president
You’ve stated before what an earnest president you think Cleveland was. What say you? Is it bunk?
Holy crap, I am 5 years in the future and you’ve got 750K subs now! Who would have ever thought!
Love this video, thank you so much!
Hey Mr. Beat love the videos! Would you ever be interested in doing a video about Canadian history/social studies? Best regards from Ontario!
4:53 10.000 subscribers 6 years ago?
Now you have 831K subscribers!
Look how far you have come! :)
nice now approaching a million congratulations, great funny informative videos for 10 years - cheers!
Thanks buddy!
Thank you haha you're a gas man! 🤘
thank you. I like how you say stuff like sorry dude. please do it more often. I also liked and subscribed as you requested.
Congratulations on 10,000 subsribers
And I actually want you to do Top 10 best presidents name and How do you get your information and how do you pick which videos you upload?
My teacher show me a movie about this court case, I really didnt paid attention to the movie but now watching it in a video makes a lot more sense to me. I loved this video a lot.
Hey Mr. Beat!!!!!
Question: Could look into doing a vids on the senate or the house of representitives?
Thanks and any reply would be greatly appreciated. Again, Awesome stuff!
how long does it take you to make a video? what's your decision making process for which court case you'll cover? what's your decision making process for which details to cover in a video?
thanks for these awesome videos!! they're very easy to understand and follow, keep it up!
+Eric Mayhew All great questions! Thanks for watching :)
Congrats on 10K! When will you make the Q&A video?
+Alex Thank you! It comes out tomorrow. :)
Awesome! Will you feature every question asked? Because I asked you a question in the comments section of this video 2 months ago. Also, are you still taking questions? If so, I have a few more:
1. What city in Kansas do you live in?
2. Are you a Democrat or Republican?
3. What high school and college did you go to?
4. Where were you born?
Saw "Gideon's Trumpet", with Henry Fonda, back when I was in high school (1970s).
i thank you so much, Mr. Beat for your SCOTUS brief videos; your videos are full of detail with enough context to understand what went into a case and why that decision came about in the SCOTUS ruling while being fun at the same time to watch, helping me a million on studying for AP Government class!
by: mico laurente.
earl warren always popping up in the best most level headed supreme court decisions. what a guy
Another unanimous decision for mankind.
2:08 Plus, Jeff Bezos lookalike
nah he looks like Uncle Fester
What if a detective says to someone "there is the door by being interrogated " is that a reading of the Miranda warning?
You should do a video on Brady v. Maryland
I would like to hear about the Batson case out of louisville , Ky.
Could you do Johnston v Zerbst, the federal Gideon v Wainwright?. Whatever happened to those guys after the Supreme Court overturned the conviction?
I don’t usually comment on old videos, but Gideon’s epithet at 4:32 gets a ❤ from me
Hey Mr. Beat! Are you gonna to make a video about “In re Gault”?
Excellent video, although, the English caption were really off sync at times. Might want to fix that.
This story made me cry and laugh. I cried for the poor thing Gideon and I laughed because you Mr. Beat are so funny. You know how to teach.
Could you please make videos for all of these videos below. I know you have videos on some of these already. I use your videos as study tools. Thank you so much for all of your hard work, you're awesome!
Miranda v. Arizona ( I know you have this one)
Gregg v. Georgia
California v. Greenwood
Mapp v. Ohio
Gideon v. Wainwright ( I am watching this one now, thank you)
Sheppard v. Maxwell
United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Coop
Terry v. Ohio
Thanks for your suggestions! I receive so many requests that for now I only take video suggestions from my patrons on Patreon - if you pledge to on there please let me know on through the site so it’s more streamlined. Still, you might get lucky because I do really want to cover Mapp v. Ohio in the near future.
Are you going to do Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier
do us v. lopez cause it was on the AP exam and i didnt know what it was rip lol
what a legend
Do Escobedo v. Illinois
:)
Earl Warren took one of the most important desicions in supreme court
There is also a good TV movie about this called Gideon's Trumpet if memory serves me right, and it's actually worth a watch
So prior to Gideon, public defenders were non existent.
Video says that they existed for capital offenses in Florida but not for theft. The case made it a right to have a lawyer if you're accused of a crime. This only applies to cases like Gideon's, if you're sued by someone then you're on your own.
What a classic case
i agree with the court, I knew of the case but not the details. let it not be the stupidity of the man, but the judgement of his actions that which determines his guilt.
What is your opinion on alternate history?
Hell yeah Gideon is a hero to America mad respect for him teaching himself law in Prison
"God have mercy on you if you have a public defender, because the judge won't!"
I thought you were going to say Gideon represented himself in the supreme court, that would’ve been badass.
If you could get everyone to read one book of your choice, which would it be?
Gideon versus Wainwright what's a true legend many pro se litigants dreamed of getting where Gideon got to!
"I'm almost to 10,000 subscribers"
*looks and see he's currently at 816k subscribers*
Good job! lol
1. What's your favorite type of cereal
2. What made you start RUclips
3. Who was your first sub
Optional question for you to answer in qa, What events do you think helped your RUclips channel the most (whether to keep you going or in actual subs and views)
Saving my life in my Government class! Thank you
Thing is, this doesn't help much. Civil cases you get fucked and public defenders are not worth it . You'll lose your case because they are so heavily burdened
What is your favorite band?
Bruh why does Abe Fortas look like Dwane Johnson in that picture!?
He wrote a very good letter, even though he did not represent himself well in court.
How has using RUclips helped you engage with students? I graduated high school in 1998, and college in 2004, so I missed the cusp of widespread online video hosting.
Pretty interesting
This should be turned into a film
how do you fire your public defender? then force the government to pay for private attorneys?
Why do you keep saying my name at the end of each of these videos?
Ha! You finally responded!
No one:
Literally no one:
Not a single soul:
Gideon's stick figure: Yo, can I get a lawyer? I'm broke.
...
I guarantee that if the Supreme Court had to make a ruling TODAY they wouldn't guarantee the right to an attorney.
Long Lin v Mukasey 2008 please
Gideon's new lawyer sure was good.
Wouldnt his retrial with an attorney break the amendment referring to double jeopardy?
No, he wasn't found innocent the first time.
Do Snyder v Phelps - Blockmaster6567
The batting average has gone up the last couple I watch they're still not approaching the All-Star little to say the least
What is your favorite cartoon and who is your favorite character from that cartoon?
If you give instructions to your lawyer to seek 'discovery of evidence' from the police and prosecutions, whether a public defender or not, and they do not obey your directions, you can sack them.
How would you define opinion?
Henry Fonda played Gideon in a movie.
Anything on cox v state of La 1 18 65 379 US 536 85 s.ct?
I've grown to hate that judge stock photo.
The original Florida man.
watching this in 2023 and realize the current court could do away with this at anytime as they seem to be enjoying overturning precedents that have stood for decades or more.
My exam is in like 10 hrs
Good ruling
I had to watch this movie for civics. It was very interesting.
Mendoza why did u make us do this
Well now you got 68k subscribers thnx for the help bye
color*
McDonald v. Chicago, please.
johnnie cochran?
hey, do you know of any supreme court case law which supports a case that prove the state cannot force legal representation on us against our will?
Not that I know of, but the state legally cannot force legal representation on us. If we want to represent ourselves, we absolutely have that right. What state are we talking about here?
Pretty sure you always have the right to dismiss any legal representation you have, no matter the case. It would be suspicious if they forced legal representation on you, since it isn’t in their interest for you to have it at all.
Source: Con. Law degree
You have a similar sub count to athur rehi
who's ready to see the SC overturn this one next
2:33 me: WaIt A mInuTe
I just learned that Wainwright recently passed away