Lyft Industrial Deals Beauty Best Books of the Month STEM nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Weekly One ft Nina Nesbitt PCB for Musical Instruments Starting at $39.99 Grocery Handmade Tote Bags Home Gift Guide Off to College Home Gift Guide Book a house cleaner for 2 or more hours on Amazon BradsStatus BradsStatus BradsStatus  Introducing Echo Show Introducing All-New Fire HD 10 with Alexa hands-free $149.99 Kindle Oasis, unlike any Kindle you've ever held Tailgating PSFF17_gno



There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

Showing 1-10 of 58 reviews(Verified Purchases). See all 87 reviews
on April 1, 2017
Clarence Earl Gideon was arrested for a petty crime, and because he couldn’t afford one, asked for an attorney to represent him in court. His request was denied. He was convicted and sentenced to five years in the Florida State Prison. Using a pencil and prison letterhead, he appealed to the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari. Arguing that the lower court had deprived him of his Sixth Amendment right to have an attorney for his defense and that he had been denied due process under the Fourteenth Amendment, Gideon told the Court that as a layman he was incapable of defending himself.

Gideon’s chance of finding a needle in a haystack was infinitely greater than having his case heard by the Supreme Court. But it was. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) changed the whole course of American legal history. Gideon’s incredible story, and the story of how the Supreme Court chooses and decides cases, is the subject of this very readable book by Anthony Lewis. Lewis knows the ins and outs of the American judicial system. He was a New York Times reporter who covered the Supreme Court from 1957 to 1964. He also taught law at Harvard from 1974 to 1989.

The Supreme Court receives some 2500 appeals each term (or did so at the time of Gideon’s appeal) of which 150 are actually granted a hearing. “Review by the Supreme Court is in the interest of the law, its appropriate exposition and enforcement, not in the mere interest of the litigants,” the author quotes Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes. In other words, the Court accepted Gideon’s appeal not out of the goodness of its heart but to address a legal issue. The issue that interested the Court was whether or not criminal defendants tried in state court who were unable to afford an attorney, and not provided one by the state, were being denied their Constitutional rights. In federal court, defendants without means were provided legal counsel by court. Under federal law, it was their Constitutional right. But under state law? That was a different issue all together. The states were not bound by Bill of Rights guarantees. “Our Constitution created a system of dual governments, state and federal, each with its own laws,” writes the author. Tried in a state court, Gideon was not guaranteed the right to an attorney. Fortunately for him, issues of federal law sometimes arise in state courts, and therefore can be appealed, and this was one.

Twenty years earlier, in a similar case (Betts v. Brady, 1942), the Court ruled in favor of the state—an indigent criminal defendant did not have the right to an attorney. By 1962, when Gideon filed his appeal, the makeup of the court had changed significantly (more liberal/more activist) and decided to reexamine the merit’s of the Court’s prior decision. Having accepted Gideon’s appeal, the Court asked one of the top attorneys in the nation (future Supreme Court justice Abe Fortas) to represent Gideon. Working pro bono, Fortas put the expertise of his powerful Washington law firm to work on the case, with no stone left unturned.

The state of Florida, meanwhile, assigned a 26-year-old assistant attorney general named Bruce Robert Jacob to represent the state. He argued that defendants without means were perfectly capable of acting as their own attorney. Indeed, Gideon had done quite well for himself in court, in a losing case. Jacob also made an appeal to all 49 states to file friend-of-court briefs on behalf of Florida. There was one very big problem, however: 23 states favored a new standard of fairness on state criminal procedure. Only two states—Alabama and North Carolina—spoke up for Florida.

The Court’s ruling was unanimous. As with state capital offenses, defendants who could not afford an attorney now must be provided one by the state. Gideon’s conviction was overturned. He was assigned an attorney and his case was retried in a Florida court. This time, he won, and was released from prison.

Gideon v. Wainwright was one of three Supreme Court decisions to significantly alter criminal procedure so that it better protected the rights of the accused. The other two are Miranda v. Arizona (1966) and Mapp v. Ohio (1961). Conservative critics have accused the court in such cases as legislating rather adjudicating the law. Perhaps. But how much longer would it have taken Congress to pass such legislation, if ever?

Justice Walter Schaefer of Illinois has advanced “the relation of the United States to the rest of the world” today as one argument for national standards of criminal procedure. “The quality of a nation’s civilization can be largely measured by the method it uses in the enforcement of its criminal law.” Adds the author, “The Supreme Court is in a strategic position to give voice to national ideals.” Brilliant book.
0Comment| One person found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on June 6, 2014
I am taking a Modern American Law class this semester, and this book was one of the required texts. The book is deceiving because its size does not reflect the amount of information it provides on every single page. This book and its content fascinated me from page one. By the time you get to the end of this book, you feel as if you've played a major part in this case. This is a fabulous book, and I would definitely recommend it to anyone, law student or not.
0Comment| 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on June 1, 2013
This book was great, especially for somebody who's training to become a legal professional, but really for all U.S. Citizens who want to understand how our justice system works in the highest court in the land.

Unfortunately, many jurisdictions still don't comply with the Supreme Court Mandate that indigent defendants charged with a crime cannot receive a fair trial without a criminal defense attorney! This is costing us a bundle, because it's expensive to keep people in jail & we're broke. Not to mention that, in the cases where innocent people are convicted without a fair trial, we still have the criminals free among us & they are going to commit more crimes because they've learned they can get away with it!

I would recommend this book for anybody who is concerned about civil rights and our justice system. And if you read this one you'll also want to read "Chasing Gideon," which talks about current problems with indigent defense in various jurisdictions. This will give you a clearer picture of what's happening now. This book, "Chasing Gideon," is also available through Amazon.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on June 20, 2017
A docent at the National Archives in Washington DC recommended this book. Good read.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on August 18, 2017
required reading for a Politics class
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on March 31, 2017
Great Book!
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on March 15, 2013
Clarence Earl Gideon was just another prisoner asking the Supreme Court to get him out of jail…until the Court agreed to hear his case. At that point, he became the catalyst around which events swirled and resulted in a historical decision by the highest Court in the land.

The book gives an excellent account of the evolution of the right to counsel law, the Supreme Court’s struggle with balancing states’ rights and individual liberty, the difference of opinion among Supreme Court justices regarding stare decisis, and the Court’s willingness to reverse one of its prior decisions.

An excellent read for anyone interested in justice, the law, and civil liberty.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on December 19, 2014
For some reason Lewis' book reminded me, more than anything else, of the classic works of the old DC novelist Allen Drury, who wrote about life in Washington in this era. Most specifically, it does so in the way in which it is filled with confidence in the public men of that city and the institutions of American government itself.

The prose is brisk and clear, as to be expected from a journalist of that era. This is worth reading.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on September 16, 2017
MAGNIFICENT BOOK by ICONIC AUTHOR I bought it as gift for my children. During these dark days ALL OF US MUST argue for ACCESS TO JUSTICE
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on January 14, 2017
It was required reading for me, but it's a good one. It's good to know where certain protections or rights came from, and that they weren't always taken for granted.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse