User:Arasmussen27/sandbox

User: Scbell24601 (Wikied)/Sandbox

Intro

Gideon's Trumpet is a 1980 historical drama television film. It is based on the biographical book of the same name written by Anthony Lewis. The film depicts the historical events before and during the United Supreme Court case of Gideon v. Wainwright that brought the right to counsel to criminal defendants that did not have to fill special requirements. Decades later after the ruling, the case has made impacts on individual states, the country of the United States as a whole, and even on a global scale. The film was first distributed by Worldvision Enterprises, and it premiered on April 30, 1980 on CBS-TV as a Hallmark Hall of Fame. The feature stars Henry Fonda as the main character of Clarence Earl Gideon, Jose Ferrer as Abe Fortas, and John Houseman as the Chief Justice of the United States. Other notable actors and actresses involved in the production of the film were Fay Wray, Sam Jeff, and Dean Jagger. The film was directed by Robert L. Collins. It was produced and written under the direction of John Houseman and David W. Rintels. The film was recognized and nominated for three Emmy Awards the same year it premiered on television on September 7, 1980.

Historical Context

Starting in the year of 1937, federal laws would still be under the direction of the Congress Clause of Congress, which still continued on until the year of 1995. In the 1960s and leading onto the 1970s, the use of judicial review in the United States Supreme Court was more focused on the protection of rights in the federal government rather than rights that were protected in the state governments.This was seen as more as an aim that liberals supported than an aim that conservatives supported, and the Warren Court sought to interpret how much can Congress enforce under the Fourteenth Amendment in the 1960s. Cases like Powell v Alabama in 1932 and Johnson v. Zerbst made progress towards the rights of counsel for indigent criminals. The ruling of the Betts v Brady case in 1942 had been changed to the point where it allowed the right of counsel to an indigent criminal as long as they could prove certain factors, like mental illness or if it was a capital case.

The Case

Clarence Earl Gideon was arrested for trespassing into the Bay Harbor Pool Area and petty larceny, and was to be trialed. Judge McCrary was the judge in his first trial, and the prosecuting lawyer was William Harris. After requesting for a lawyer to represent him in his case, the judge denied him, which led to Gideon to defend himself as best as he could. However, due to a lack of information that supported Gideon and how McCrary interpreted the ruling of Betts v. Brady, Gideon was quickly sentenced to five years in the Florida State prison. Bruce R. Jacobs states that a lack of experienced lawyers in the area was also the cause for Gideon’s verdict. While serving his sentence, Gideon filed a writ of habeas corpus to the Florida Supreme Court, but the petition was denied. He then wrote a writ of certiorari that was accepted by the Court to review, which had Abe Fortas representing Gideon and Louis V. Wainwright representing the party against Gideon when the previous opposition resigned. This led to an unanimous decision supporting Gideon in the United States Supreme Court. At the time in 1962, the Chief Justice of the United States was Earl Warren. Gideon was released from the prison to have another trial where he was fairly counseled by defense lawyer Winton F. Turner. New evidence was brought forth and additional witnesses, who validated Gideon’s good character, shared their testimonies. Less than an hour after the concluding statements were given, the jury agreed Gideon was not guilty.

The Legacy

Public

In the public eye, Gideon v. Wainwright has been a subject that has been highly discussed among many scholars in recent years with regards to how well it is implemented. Justin F. Marceau, an associate professor at the University of Denver for the Sturm College of Law explains in a 2011 law review how the right of counsel that was influenced by Gideon impedes on other rights that are involved in criminal procedure, such as the right to challenge a previous conviction in the court. However, Marceau concludes his statement in the following quote about what this means for the future of the case that “there is room for measured optimism about the use of the right of counsel...to facilitate rather than impede…, and he suggests that cases at the time like Martinez v Ryan could bring together the legacy of Gideon. Another reaction to the case that was talked about by Sara Mayeux, who was a Sharswood Fellow at the University of Pennsylvania Law School at the time, wrote a journal in 2016 explaining about how the legacy seems to be treated by other scholars as not as a significant change as she explains other scholars think. She concludes that the “present disconnection between widespread celebration...and widespread cynicism about its implementation rather than a lamentable but predictable disconnect between platonic ideals and messy reality, is itself a historical phenomenon worth investigating” and can encourage many people to actively talk about issues that are getting worse as long as lawyers and others actively take the role to solve those problems.

Nationally and Statewide

After it was declared that each person has the right to counsel, questions arose as to who would make sure this was provided. It was decided that in order to provide a stable source of defense system funding, sufficient funds should come from the state. Recently, six states do not have a statewide indigent defense agency, but they do administer the trials on a county level. Thirty-four states have indigent defense entities, such as a council, board, or commission. Results prove only eleven of these thirty-four commissions are independent from political influence within their respective state. State budgets show that the majority of their indigent defense budget is used to pay lawyers and other staff needed to defend individuals who cannot afford a lawyer. It has been made clear that while states must follow certain rules to uphold the Gideon v Wainwright ruling, but much of how they handle this is up to them.

Indigent Defense in the United States: An Analysis of State Frameworks for Ensuring the Effective Assistance of Counsel

Globally

In the United States, the right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment has helped to form the protection of privacy in the United States Constitution along with the Fourth Amendment. In 1966 in the United Nations, the International Covenant On Political and Civil Political Rights mentions that criminal indigents have the right of counsel if they could not afford, which 167 nations have ratified in 2013. The United Nations has included included ways to add the right of counsel in the International Criminal Court and the Special Tribunals. In addition, regional treaties in other countries, like the African Charter of Human Rights and Peoples’ Rights have also made efforts to incorporate the right counsel. In the countries India, Zimbabwe, Japan, Uganda, China, and Australia, the right to counsel has been interpreted in some way  in some way in their laws and constitutions, but how they distribute that aid does vary country-to-country, such as Uganda only allowing right to counsel in cases like life imprisonment or Japan with only selecting counsel if the accused requests it themselves.