Powell v AL
POWELL v ALABAMA
United States Supreme Court
287 U.S. 45 (1932)
FACTS: Nine young black boys riding in an open train car were involved in a fight. When the fight ceased, two white women claimed the black boys raped them. Once the boys got off the train in Scottsboro, Alabama, police picked them up and placed them in jail. The men appeared in court, frightened, and unrepresented. The defendants were charged with a capital offence and therefore had the right for counsel to be appointed to them by the court. However, the court decided to call on the lawyers from the surrounding area. Of course no lawyer came to their defense. The day before the case, on April 6, a lawyer took their case. Because he was not able to prepare an adequate defense 8 of the 9 defendants were convicted and sentenced to death.
ISSUE: Whether the defendants were given adequate counsel and if their right to due process under the 14th amendment was violated?
HOLDING: NO, the defendants did not get an adequate defense and yes the defendant’s rights were abridged.
ARGUMENTS: For the petitioners, they argued that adequate counsel before trial for preparation and presentation are rights included in the due process clause. Also because there was no fair, impartial, and deliberate trial, it was a denial of due process. Petitioner’s and their counsel had plenty of time to prepare. Also the trial was fair and impartial and that the extra security for the defendants cannot be taken as the opposite.
DISSCUSSION: Justice Sutherland delivered the opinion of the court. They said “a defendant should be afforded a fair opportunity to secure counsel of his own choice.” The court also determined that the defendants were not “defendants were not accorded the right of counsel in any substantial sense”. When the court appointed the members of the bar from the area he knowingly denied the defendants their right to counsel. Paired with the poor indefinite charge to get the defendants counsel with their
United States Supreme Court
287 U.S. 45 (1932)
FACTS: Nine young black boys riding in an open train car were involved in a fight. When the fight ceased, two white women claimed the black boys raped them. Once the boys got off the train in Scottsboro, Alabama, police picked them up and placed them in jail. The men appeared in court, frightened, and unrepresented. The defendants were charged with a capital offence and therefore had the right for counsel to be appointed to them by the court. However, the court decided to call on the lawyers from the surrounding area. Of course no lawyer came to their defense. The day before the case, on April 6, a lawyer took their case. Because he was not able to prepare an adequate defense 8 of the 9 defendants were convicted and sentenced to death.
ISSUE: Whether the defendants were given adequate counsel and if their right to due process under the 14th amendment was violated?
HOLDING: NO, the defendants did not get an adequate defense and yes the defendant’s rights were abridged.
ARGUMENTS: For the petitioners, they argued that adequate counsel before trial for preparation and presentation are rights included in the due process clause. Also because there was no fair, impartial, and deliberate trial, it was a denial of due process. Petitioner’s and their counsel had plenty of time to prepare. Also the trial was fair and impartial and that the extra security for the defendants cannot be taken as the opposite.
DISSCUSSION: Justice Sutherland delivered the opinion of the court. They said “a defendant should be afforded a fair opportunity to secure counsel of his own choice.” The court also determined that the defendants were not “defendants were not accorded the right of counsel in any substantial sense”. When the court appointed the members of the bar from the area he knowingly denied the defendants their right to counsel. Paired with the poor indefinite charge to get the defendants counsel with their