#55 · 2026-09-30 · Case
Gideon v. Wainwright
Answer: Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963). The Court held that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel is a fundamental right incorporated against the states via the Fourteenth Amendment, requiring appointment of counsel for indigent defendants in state felony cases and overruling Betts v. Brady. Later cases set the “actual imprisonment” line for misdemeanors (Argersinger; Scott).
Rule to remember
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) held that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel is a fundamental right that states must honor in felony prosecutions through the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
Key elements and checks
- Indigent criminal defendant in state court.
- Criminal prosecution for a felony (original holding).
- Sixth Amendment right to counsel is fundamental.
- Selective incorporation via the Fourteenth Amendment.
- State must appoint counsel absent a knowing and intelligent waiver.
- Betts v. Brady overruled; later clarified that appointment is required when imprisonment is actually imposed (Argersinger; Scott).
In the source’s words
““lawyers in criminal courts are necessities, not luxuries.””
Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963) — LII (opinion)
““Betts v. Brady should be overruled.””
Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963) — LII (opinion)
Meaningful state variation: States may extend appointed-counsel rights beyond the federal floor (e.g., to more misdemeanors). The constitutional minimum is appointment when imprisonment is actually imposed; fines-only convictions do not require appointed counsel under Scott.