Legal Brief Gideon V Wainwright
Gideon V. Wainwright
On June 2, 1961 there were some items stolen from Bay Harbor Pool Room, such as five dollars and a few bottles of beer and soda. Henry Cook told the police that he had seen Clarence Gideon walk out of the pool hall with a bottle of wine and his pockets filled with coins, then got into a taxi and left the joint. Major people that were involved were Clarence Earl Gideon the plaintiff, Louie L. Wainwright the defendant, H. G. Cochran, Jr. was the original respondent. The question about this trial was should a poor person be able to have an attorney provided for them so they can have a fair trial as same as the people could afford the attorney.
It is said that the Gideon V. Wainwright was neither Conservative nor Liberal. Instead it was a Constitutional based that was relative to the VI Article of the Bill of Rights. But also some people say that the lawyers of the trial were liberal. The lawyers believed that both the poor people should have the same opportunities as the richer people have. Such as a poor person who could not afford an attorney, they could have one provided for them. So that everyone could have the same possible chance.
This case would be a strict construction because there is only one way that the trial could be taken. Persons who could not afford lawyer must be appointed one by the state. This could be taken really only one way and that is that the State has to provide a lawyer to people that can not afford it.
Gideon won the case over Wainwright. The Gideon V. Wainwright helped change every day life because the court asserted that poor people were being deprived of their Sixth Amendment constitutional right to an attorney. This was applied to the states under the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause. This gave poor people the same chance for a fair trial as people who could afford to hire an
On June 2, 1961 there were some items stolen from Bay Harbor Pool Room, such as five dollars and a few bottles of beer and soda. Henry Cook told the police that he had seen Clarence Gideon walk out of the pool hall with a bottle of wine and his pockets filled with coins, then got into a taxi and left the joint. Major people that were involved were Clarence Earl Gideon the plaintiff, Louie L. Wainwright the defendant, H. G. Cochran, Jr. was the original respondent. The question about this trial was should a poor person be able to have an attorney provided for them so they can have a fair trial as same as the people could afford the attorney.
It is said that the Gideon V. Wainwright was neither Conservative nor Liberal. Instead it was a Constitutional based that was relative to the VI Article of the Bill of Rights. But also some people say that the lawyers of the trial were liberal. The lawyers believed that both the poor people should have the same opportunities as the richer people have. Such as a poor person who could not afford an attorney, they could have one provided for them. So that everyone could have the same possible chance.
This case would be a strict construction because there is only one way that the trial could be taken. Persons who could not afford lawyer must be appointed one by the state. This could be taken really only one way and that is that the State has to provide a lawyer to people that can not afford it.
Gideon won the case over Wainwright. The Gideon V. Wainwright helped change every day life because the court asserted that poor people were being deprived of their Sixth Amendment constitutional right to an attorney. This was applied to the states under the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause. This gave poor people the same chance for a fair trial as people who could afford to hire an