Gideon v Wainwright Supreme Court Arguments in the United States
Gideon v Wainwright Supreme Court Arguments
Introduction to Gideon v Wainwright Supreme Court Arguments
Gideon had not been able to afford a lawyer in his initial trial, and he could not afford to hire one to take his case to the Supreme Court. However, unlike the trial court, the Supreme Court appointed counsel to represent him. The Court chose Abe Fortas, who was a partner in a well-respected law firm in Washington, D.C., and the personal attorney of the vice president of the United States at that time, Lyndon B. Johnson. (When Johnson later became president, he appointed Fortas to serve on the Supreme Court.) Florida’s assistant attorney general, Bruce Robert Jacob, represented Louie L. Wainwright, who as head of the Florida prison system was named as the defendant in the case.
The state of Florida contacted all 50 states, asking for their aid in the case. Florida tried to persuade the other states that convictions of criminals would be more difficult if the Court ruled in Gideon’s favor. Florida also argued that the states should oppose Gideon’s petition because they would be required to provide attorneys for poor defendants at taxpayer expense if Gideon prevailed. However, only two states-Alabama and North Carolina-joined Florida in supporting the proposition that states should not be required to provide attorneys for poor criminal defendants. The attorneys general of 22 other states, representing all sections and regions of the country, sent briefs in support of Gideon. One of these briefs came from Walter F. Mondale, then attorney general of Minnesota, who later become vice president of the United States.” (1)