Does any one please provide me a summary about the Gideon’s Trumpet movie ?
1 Answer
Read Explanation
Explanation:
The movie "Gideon's Trumpet" refers to the infamous Gideon v. Wainwright case that went all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS)
In 1963, Clarence Earl Gideon was arrested and charged in Florida state court on the felony of breaking and entering into a poolroom and having the intent to commit a misdemeanor offense.
Mr. Gideon appeared in court without a lawyer, and requested that the court appoint one for him. Under Florida state law, however, attorneys may only be appointed to a poor person in capital cases (a case for murder).
In the movie, Gideon is portrayed at giving an amateur attempt at defending himself in court, and obviously lost the case, being sent to jail.
Gideon felt this wasn't right, and went to the prison library to read and study books on Constitutional law. He found that, under the sixth amendment, all defendants are guaranteed the right to an attorney, but it did not specify whether this right extended towards non-capital cases, so he filed a habeas corpus petition (a petition that brings an inmate before the court to determine if this ruling was unlawful) to the Florida State Supreme Court, though they denied it.
In the movie, the SCOTUS agreed to see Gideon's case, and a lawyer (Abe Fortas) argues before the SCOTUS that every American has the right to an attorney even if it isn't a capital case. The SCOTUS ruled unanimously (9-0) with Mr. Fortas, which acquitted not only Gideon, but also every single inmate across the country who had been incarcerated without being given a lawyer during trial from prison. Many of these inmates' cases' statute of limitations had run out, so they could not have a re-trial, and were free to go.
Once Gideon is freed, he still has to go to a re-trial, which he feels is unlawful and double jeopardy (being tried for the same crime twice, which is illegal). This was not true, however, as he was being tried upon appeal, and not the same crime by the same court system, so he had to defend himself, but with a lawyer of his choosing (Fred Turner).
During the re-trial, Mr. Turner pulls up the same witnesses from the original trial, but questions them much more articulately, and one certain witness becomes fidgety and it is implied that this certain witness broke into the poolroom, not Gideon. The prosecution made their last argument to the jury that they have to argue based on facts, not speculation, but the jury ruled that Gideon was innocent, and he was free to go.
If you have a quiz on this tomorrow in Government, it would be smart to become familiar with these terms:
Writ of Habeas Corpus
Writ of certiorari
Appellate Court
In Forma Pauperis
Statute of limitations
Double Jeopardy (Read #2)
