decided to review Powell v. Alabama (1932) and Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) for this week’s post. I found these two cases to be similar in the resulting opinions issued by the United States Supreme Court. In both cases the court found that the Sixth Amendment rights of the defendants were violated by the trial courts.

Powell v. Alabama was significant in multiple aspects. It established the precedent that not only must a lawyer be assigned but the court, but that that lawyer must also provide effective counsel to the defendant. The Supreme Court recognized that a counsel who never meets with the defendant is not providing the legal representation to the defendant that was the intent of the framers of the Constitution. The second precedent that I think it set, even it if was not intended, is that all persons accused of a crime are entitled to …show more content…
Wainwright (1963) became just as significant a case as Powell v. Alabama in that it further ensured all persons charged with a felony were entitled to be represented by a lawyer, regardless of it being a capital punishment case or not. Prior to this decision, defendants in federal cases were provided this right, but the state of Florida only provided legal counsel for capital punishment cases. This decision expanded this right as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, to all cases both federal and state. Even more significant with this decision is the fact that it not only ensured the Sixth Amendment rights were extended to state level trial, but that all rights from the Constitution were now guaranteed at state level courts as well as federal level courts. In his concurring opinion Justice William O. Douglas stated “does not apply a watered-down version of the Bill of Rights to the states” (www.oyez.org). I fell this is one of the most critical aspects of legal precedence set but the Supreme Court because is vastly changed not only defendants right but all rights under the