LANDMARK CASE
Gideon v. Wainwright
372 U.S. 335 (1963) · Supreme Court of the United States · Criminal procedure
At a glance
- Citation: 372 U.S. 335 (1963)
- Court: Supreme Court of the United States
- Area of law: Criminal procedure
- In one line: Yes. The right to counsel is fundamental to a fair trial.
1 Facts
Clarence Gideon, too poor to hire a lawyer, was denied appointed counsel and convicted.
2 Issue
Must the state provide a lawyer to poor defendants in serious criminal cases?
3 What the court decided
Yes. The right to counsel is fundamental to a fair trial.
4 Why it matters
A parallel to India's Article 39A and Hussainara Khatoon.
5 Think about it
Why is a lawyer essential to a fair trial?
6 Analyse it yourself
Read the full judgment from an official source or a law database, then brief it in seven steps: facts, issues, arguments, decision, ratio, obiter and significance. Always check the citation before you rely on it.
7 More cases on Criminal procedure
- Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v. Union of India (2020) 14 SCC 12
- Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273
- D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) 1 SCC 416
- Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303
- Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565
- Joginder Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1994) 4 SCC 260
All 366 landmark cases · Today's Case of the Day · Weekly quiz
← Gian Singh v. State of PunjabGirish Ramchandra Deshpande v. Central Information Commissioner →
A short teaching summary for students. Educational content only, not legal advice.