W 7 Assignment

Week 7 Assignment: Part II: How the Courts Address or Respect Our Rights as Citizens – Presentation

Required Resources

Read/review the following resources for this activity:

· Textbook: Chapter 17. Also, Chapter 11 and 12 from Week 6 might still be relevant.

· Lesson

· Minimum of 2 scholarly sources in addition to the textbook.


This is Part II of the assignment you submitted in Week 6.

Using the case outline (Part I: How the Courts Address or Respect Our Rights as Citizens) you submitted in Week 6, prepare and submit a presentation, which will either be a narrated PowerPoint, a Kaltura Video, or some other format as approved by your instructor. Be sure to verify the presentation format with your instructor before starting work on this assignment.

The presentation Point presentation will need to include:

· Name the case

· Discuss the facts of the case

· Discuss the history of the case (what laws or legal action was taken)

· Discuss the issues or the facts of the case and legal questions the court must decide

· Discuss if the court’s decision or holdings was for the plaintiff or for the defendant and what were the reasons for the decision?

· Discuss the concurring and dissenting opinions from the judge or if a jury trial, the jury.

Important: In this assignment, you are expected to elaborate the points you made in the prior assignment in Week 6. This assignment will be graded on your strength to elaborate and explain the facts of the case and proper use of visual aids, good narration, and presenting to the case and how well you stick to the case. For example, if you are using the PowerPoint, you are also expected to include proper visuals that are relevant to the case. Do not copy-paste the outline into this and call it complete.



Writing Requirements (APA format)

· Length: The presentation must be 10-15 slides long if using PowerPoint (excluding cover and reference pages)


· Font should not be smaller than size 16-point

· Parenthetical in-text citations included and formatted in APA style

· Title/Introduction slide required

· References slide minimum of 2 scholarly sources in addition to textbook if cited)

· Use the speaker notes to elaborate on the content on the slides










Oscar L Perez Torres


Chamberlain University




Professor Vernon Gardner


June 12, 2022













How the Court Addresses or Respects Our Rights as Citizens

1. Case summary

A Clarence Earl Gideon-related court case was Gideon v. Wainwright, which was heard in 1963. Breaking into a pool hall to steal money was one of the accusations against him. By law, he was not given a lawyer by the state of Florida to represent him. After being refused free legal representation, this man spoke up in defense of himself. After that, he was just found guilty. Gideon filed a habeas corpus petition against Louie L. Wainwright. He won. Abe Fortas fought the issue to the Supreme Court. Because the Sixth Amendment guarantees federal defendants access to an attorney in federal proceedings, he claimed that his conviction should be overturned (Backus & Marcus, 2018). If a person is charged with a crime and does not have a lawyer, the state violates due process. Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren’s judgment was one of several that expanded the protections of the Bill of Rights to state activities, even those of suspected criminals. In 1972, the court ruled that any defendant who might spend more than one day in prison if convicted had to be represented by a lawyer (Bertucio, 2020).

2. The Outline

TitleGitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652 (1925)

Facts: When Gideon appeared in court, he was charged with breaking and entering in the state of Florida. Gideon can’t afford to employ an attorney because of his financial predicament. As a result, he requested that the court appoint a counsel on his behalf. But the judge rejected him because, according to Florida law, the court may only appoint a counsel to represent a person who is facing the death sentence. To defend himself against charges, Gideon became his own attorney. The defendant was given a sentence of five years in prison after the verdict of guilty was rendered by the jury (Stubbs, 2019). Gideon is of the opinion that the first instance court’s decision breaches the constitutional rights that an attorney must represent. He subsequently petitioned the Supreme Court of Florida for habeas corpus relief but was rejected.

History: The Harbor Pool Room in Panama City was burglarized on June 3rd, 1961. An eyewitness claims that at about 5:30 in the morning, Mr. Clarence Earl Gideon was observed leaving the room for the final time. Clarence Earl Gideon was taken into custody by the police on these accusations. They discovered $25.5 in currency in his pockets after searching for him. It was said in court that Gideon entered the room with the nefarious purpose of stealing small amounts of cash.

Legal questions: The court had to decide whether or not Gideon was guilty or innocent. Gideon’s sentence, if convicted, would be for how long? A decision on the constitutionality of Gideon’s conviction fell to the U.S. Supreme Court. Is it ethical to appoint a lawyer to represent an unrepresented defendant?

Decision or holdings: The Sixth Amendment to the United States of America’s Constitution was the most significant ruling in this case (Oyez, 2021). As for Gideon’s case, it was relied on police evidence and the attorney’s statements to make its determination, which was based only on the facts. But when Gideon argued that he had a right to counsel, the jury agreed with him. Federal law allows a defendant who can demonstrate to the court that he is well-versed in the facts of the case to forego his right to counsel (Stubbs, 2019).

Verdict and opinion: The lawsuit began on January 15th, 1963, and ended on March 18th, 1963, with a decision (Stubbs, 2019). Betts v. Brady was unanimously overturned by the court on its own merits. Justine Black, the dissenting judge in the Betts case, wrote the court’s decision. John Roberts, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, penned the opposing opinion. The court decided to appoint Gideon a new counsel to defend him after the first trial he was involved in ended in a mistrial (Oyez, 2021).























Regardless of whether or not the charges against the defendant are severe, this case demonstrated that counsel should be assigned to represent those who cannot afford an attorney to defend them (Backus & Marcus, 2018). There should be no distinction between the affluent and poor regarding human rights. It was a fantastic judgment since it safeguards the rights of all citizens.


Backus, M. S., & Marcus, P. (2018). The right to counsel in criminal cases: Still a national crisis. Geo. Wash. L. Rev.86, 1564.

Bertucio, B. (2020, May 21). The political theology of justice hugo black: Journal of law and religion. Cambridge Core. Retrieved June 8, 2022, from


Oyez. (2021). Gideon v. Wainwright. https://www.oyez.org/cases/1962/155

Stubbs, J. K. (2019). The Ripple Effects of Gideon: Recognizing the Human Right to Legal Counsel in Civil Adversarial Proceedings. Stetson L. Rev.49, 457.

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *