Clarence Earl Gideon, a poor drifter, took on the State of Florida in 1963 in the Supreme Court and won! That’s the story, which author Anthony Lewis told in his 1965 book “Gideon’s Trumpet,” available at Amazon here.
The importance of Gideon is that in his case Gideon v. Wainwright, the US Supreme Court ruled that criminal defendants have the right to an attorney even if they cannot afford one.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/95908/95908aed9368a1a1e99d3be998a5ff6497c5b49a" alt="US Supreme Court US Supreme Court"
Supreme Court of the United States. Sunira Moses, CC BY-SA 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0, via Wikimedia Commons.
I must confess that growing up, I assumed this right to a lawyer was embedded in the Constitution. I did not realize that it derived from the Court’s interpretation of the Constitution and the 14th Amendment.
Through a unanimous decision of the Justices, the Court ruled that the 14th Amendment through the due process clause establishes a right for a criminal defendant to have legal representation, and if they cannot afford one, the state must appoint an attorney on their behalf.
An interesting 1980s made-for-TV movie based on the book is available with Henry Fonda starring and portraying Clarence Gideon.
A key aspect of this ruling is that the Supreme Court had overturned its previous ruling in Betts v. Brady from 20 years earlier. This 1942 case held that no court-appointed attorney in state criminal proceedings was necessary, except in special circumstances, such as illiteracy or low intelligence of the defendant.
Recent debates over the Court overturning prior rulings suggest that such situations are not something the Court should do.
What say you?