The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution establishes the rights prescribed to an individual in criminal courts. The final clause stipulates that an individual is “to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.” Questions arose because of this, such as if the “right to counsel in criminal cases extend to felony defendants in state courts?” This question became the issue in the landmark Supreme Court case of Gideon v. Wainwright (1963). The ruling was a unanimous yes, and the common perception of the ruling was that it was a restoration of justice and the promotion of individual protections due to the applicability of appointed counsel for a fair trial. Instead, injustice resulted from the government’s position. The ruling of Gideon spurred on an opportunity to promote justice within the legal systems by way of politics. However, such beneficial involvement has not been successful due to the teetering scales of justice continuously leaning towards the accuser, the government, rather than being equal to the accused, the individual. This is identifiable through specialized representation, the usage of effective resources, proper money allotment, and unconstitutional excessive powers of the prosecution and judges.
In Gideon, Justice Hugo Black wrote in the majority opinion that the American people need to “recognize that in our adversary system of criminal justice, any person [hauled] into court, who is too poor to hire a lawyer, cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him.” This is because most people are not equipped with the legal knowledge to defend themselves. The practice of law is a specialized skill that only a few are accredited to practice. The lawyer’s job is to defend those charged with a crime because they cannot effectively defend themselves in court. Justice Sutherland noted in Powell v. Alabama (1932) that “the right to be heard would be, in many cases, of little avail if it did not comprehend the right to be heard by counsel.” The accuser is represented by a prosecutor who is a practicing lawyer, so it would be fair for the accused to be defended by a lawyer of equal status.
All cases require specialized legal counsel, for example in cases pertaining to immigration law. Betsy Fisher, Policy Director of the International Refugee Assistance Project, noted that legal assistance is beneficial to “explain why facts of the [refugee’s] case demonstrate that the individual should be considered for resettlement.” An average person would have little knowledge of the rigorous legal process, let alone someone who is trying to start a new life in a new country. Unless the defendant’s counsel has the skillset and resources for fair representation, there is something pointedly left out of the constitutional right to counsel.
The quality of the trial, which includes the resources spent on the case, is another imperative factor for a trial’s fairness. The injustice present within state and local levels has grown dramatically in the court system due to money allotment. Black noted in his opinion that governments “spend vast sums of money to establish machinery to try defendants accused of [a] crime.” In New York State (NYS), the Unified Court System (UFC) requested a budget of “$2.36 billion” for the FY 2021. For reference, The UFC is the Judicial branch of NYS with the state’s Supreme Court located in the state’s capital of Albany. With various branches, the system hears about three million cases annually. One subsection of the request is the Suballocation of Criminal Defense Assistance for New York City (NYC). A request of “$47 million” would go towards the NYC region under the NYS Office of Indigent Legal Services (ILS). The ILS’s purpose is to improve and promote the quality of services of the accused. They are to “assist county governments” and to “provide the effective assistance of counsel” to those that cannot afford to hire an attorney, per their constitutional right. While the allocation may seem a lot, it saw no increase in pay raises for attorneys. This led to many vacant attorney spots in the ILS. This detrimental time of “fewer attorneys [staffed for ILS] coupled with courts overwhelmed by litigants needing access to the justice system has burdened the court system.” The requested pay increase would promote specialized legal and higher quality representation. Lower quality representation under the resource and financial constraints exhibit, as Yale Law School Visiting Lecturer Stephen Bright concluded, “pressures to ignore ethical standards regarding conflicts, zeal, competence, and loyalty.” The discrepancy of money distribution shows that the government turned a blind eye to the quality representation for the accused.
Optimists saw Gideon as a floodgate opening for the increased promotion of individual rights. Their hopes were justified because, at that time, the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Earl Warren from October 1953 to June 1969, ruled in an “activist” nature as it expanded powers and rights in significant ways which involved racial segregation, civil rights, the right to due process and equal representation. Nevertheless, expanding rights seemed pointless to some in going up against the political system. With the government maintaining specialized offices housing the best prosecutors assigned to cases, these prosecutors are often given vast power. Their power would not only lead to the dictation of plea bargains and further resolve most cases, but judges would more than likely take the state’s recommendations on “pretrial release and sentencing.” Powers insofar that judges had prosecutors “write their orders” for them. Along with the standard powers prescribed, prosecutors have access to state-of-the-art laboratories, law enforcement agencies, and expert witnesses. Prosecutors can conduct their powers with limited, if any, oversight, often creating a path for unjust actions. These powers are notably dangerous for the poor and marginalized. The current system overwhelmingly targets adult African Americans and Latinos, who comprised of seventy-one percent of prison sentences in NYS in 2019 compared to thirty-three percent of Adult Whites. As Bright notes, this lacks “legitimacy and credibility and is undeserving of respect.” The unjust societal actions from politics point back to the broken promises from Gideon, as they demonstrate that the right to counsel to protect one’s liberty is neglected.
Opponents argue that the prosecution’s powers are justified, as they have the burden of proving the accused is guilty of the committed crime. Citing the Fifth Amendment, they argue that no person shall be convicted without due process of law. The prosecution, also known as the state, needs to establish order and be able to justly convict. The state’s purpose is to establish order and to protect the people’s rights, as it is declared in the Declaration of Independence: the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. While I realize the importance of the state’s burden, the opposition falls short because the one-sided system has previously convicted innocent people. Issues “such as the [the state’s] pervasive racism –from stops by law enforcement officers to disparate sentencing– are ignored.” The political landscape has disproportionally created injustice by instituting laws and reforms that either fail to lessen the problem or make it forceful. NYC’s infamous Stop-and-Frisk Policy, which allowed the New York Police Department (NYPD) to stop citizens and interrogate and search them based on reasonable personal suspicion, was found unconstitutional because it led to immense racial profiling. The injustice of the accused starts for many at the beginning of the legal process and continues all the way through to the accusation of a crime. Even still, the requirement of counsel for defendants, guaranteed by Gideon, continued to allow for a disparity in the type of quality representation prescribed to their clients. How can the state promote the welfare of its citizens through justice if it simultaneously promotes injustice towards certain citizens? The state exceeding its power in promoting injustice towards its citizens can be found in the right to counsel. The inferiority of the defense compared to the state concerning appointed attorneys is grave because court-appointed attorneys are overworked, overburdened, and undermatched. This is an unforeseen consequence from Gideon.
The prosecutors and judges take it a step further in their excessive powers and disregard toward the right to counsel. Bright notes many examples of this. For example, “seventy percent of defendants in misdemeanor cases in twenty-one Florida counties entered pleas of guilty or no contest at arraignments that lasted an average of 2.93 minutes in 2011.” Also, a further study demonstrated that “one-third [was] not represented by counsel.” Likewise, another study indicated that defendants were “not advised of their right to counsel, and others were handed forms encouraging them to waive counsel.” The restoration of constitutional principles to promote a “fair system of justice,” Gideon noted that those who are not represented cannot be assured a fair trial without the appointment of counsel. The Gideon ruling utilized Grosjean v. American Press Co. (1938) as a mandatory authority. The Court ruled in Grosjean that the right to counsel in a criminal prosecution is protected from “‘federal action’” and protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The blunt forms of negligence towards the accused are horrendous and a clear abuse of power. It goes against the precedents from Grosjean, Gideon, and Powell. This abuse compromises the legitimacy of the Court’s power because the government has felt no need to resolve the situation. The government, simultaneously protecting the right to counsel, equally promotes the right to unlawful conviction by means of failing to be judicial in their proceedings.
While the injustice is colossal, there are answers to correct it. Harvard Law School Professor Carol Steiker suggested ways that change can be implemented. Firstly, she promotes a call to action to organizations that oversee state courts to “police” attorney actions and their quality. In underperforming jurisdictions, the restoration of justice can promote the idea of the right to counsel to be more than adequate and provide qualitative representation. Further, the American Bar Association (ABA) has a vast voice in promoting legitimacy and justice. Despite not possessing legislative power, they “command substantial resources” by presenting “national standards for the conduct of attorneys in criminal cases.” Through the identification of specific practices that work effectively, the ABA can promote the justice and standard for the accreditation of attorneys nationwide. This can systemically promote justice in the representation of defendants as all parties, regardless of the situation, will share a similar skill set. On a similar note, the ABA produced the “Appointment and Performance of Defense Counsel in Death Penalty Cases” in 1989 and 2003. The effect outside parties have been substantial on the state. Eliciting change requires strong voices to demand it who will further protect the crucial rights that the country was founded upon, such as the right to counsel.
Gideon’s effects, while consequential at the time, have not lived up to their expectations. The need for the assistance of counsel in litigation is the fruit of the court system. Nevertheless, the fruit has rotted numerous times due to the injustice brought about by the court judges and the government. As it stands, Lady Justice is no longer blind but can see, and is currently allowing injustice to ensue from the accuser to the accused by the scales of justice teetering towards the former. The promulgation of justcounsel can be done by the legislation of laws and rectifying wrongs. The opportunity to promote justice is still present, but it requires cooperation between the courts and the state.
Endnotes
1 “U.S. Constitution - Sixth Amendment | Resources - Congress,” Constitution Annotated: Analysis and Interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, accessed November 22, 2022, https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-6/.
2 “Gideon v. Wainwright,” Oyez, accessed November 22, 2022,
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1962/155.
3 Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335, 342 (1963).
4 372 U.S. 335, 344-45.
5 Betsy Fisher, “The Importance of Legal Counsel,” Forced
Migration Review 54, no. 2 (2017): 28.
6 372 U.S. 335, 344.
7 “New York State Unified Court System Budget 2020-2021,” NY
Courts (2019): i.
8 “New York State,” 151.
9 Ibid.
10 “About Us,” New York State Office of Indigent Legal Services (ILS), accessed November 22, 2022, https://www.ils.ny.gov/.
11 Kate Lisa, “75% Raise for New York Appointed Counsel Aimed
to Broaden Indigent Defense Services,”
Spectrum News, July 27, 2022, accessed on November 22, 2022, https://spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/central-ny/politics/2022/07/27/75--raise-for-appointed-counsel-to-broaden-indigent-defense-services.
12 Lisa, “75% Raise.”
13 Ibid.
14 Ibid.
15 Stephen B. Bright and Sia M. Sanneh, “Fifty Years of Defiance
and Resistance After Gideon v. Wainwright,” The Yale Law
Journal 122, no. 8 (2013): 2167.
16 Bright and Sanneh, “Fifty Years,” 2156.
17 Ibid.
18 Ibid.
19 Ibid.
20 Ibid., 2159.
21 “NYS Adult Arrests and Prison Sentences by Race/Ethnicity in
2019,” Division of Criminal Justice Services, July 2020, https://www.criminaljustice.ny.gov/crimnet/ojsa/comparison- population-arrests-prison- demographics/2019%20Population%20Arrests%20Prison%20by %20Race.pdf.
22 Bright and Sanneh, “Fifty Years,” 2155.
23 “U.S. Constitution - Fifth Amendment | Resources - Congress,”
Constitution Annotated: Analysis and Interpretation of the U.S.
Constitution, accessed November 22, 2022,
https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-5/.
24 Bright and Sanneh, “Fifty Years,” 2154.
25 Ibid., 2163.
26 Ibid.
27 Ibid.
28 372 U.S. 335, 344.
29 372 U.S. 335, 343.
30 372 U.S. 335, 344-45 ruled that the right to counsel in state
courts was not limited to capital cases.
31 Carol S. Steiker, “Gideon at Fifty: A Problem of Political Will,”
The Yale Law Journal 122, no. 8 (2013): 2705.
32 Steiker, “Gideon at Fifty,” 2705.
33 Ibid., 2706.
