The Right to Counsel from Gideon v.
Wainwright to the
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Boston Marathon
Bombing Trial
Terri Susan Fine, Ph.D.
Professor of Political Science, UCF
and Content Specialist,
Florida Joint Center for Citizenship
Literacy Resources and End of
Course Assessments in Florida
FL DOE Test Item Specifications Stimulus
Attribute for High School U.S. History and
Middle School Civics
Items addressing …may use historical and
contemporary documents and other relevant
stimuli (e.g., maps, timelines, charts, graphs,
tables).
Literacy Resources and
National Exams
Advanced Placement U.S.
History
Skill 9: Synthesis
Advanced Placement U.S.
Government and Politics
Curricular Requirements
Combine disparate,
sometimes contradictory
evidence from primary
sources
and secondary works in order
to create a persuasive
understanding of the past.
The course includes
supplemental readings,
including primary source
materials (such as The
Federalist Papers) and
contemporary news analyses
that strengthen student
understanding of the
curriculum.
Connecting Gideon to Tsarnaev through Historical and
Contemporary Sources
At the end of today’s presentation, participants
will be able to:
A) Interpret primary sources related to the
concept of “assistance of counsel”
B) Explore historical artifacts from landmark
U.S. Supreme case materials
C) Connect U.S. Supreme Court case law to
contemporary “assistance of counsel” issues
The Sixth Amendment (1791)
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the
right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of
the State and district wherein the crime shall have been
committed, which district shall have been previously
ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and
cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the
witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for
obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the
Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Gideon v. Wainwright Outcome
“Without a lawyer, the defendant cannot properly
evaluate the legality of his arrest, he cannot determine
the validity of the indictment, whether a search and
seizure has been lawful, or whether a confession is
admissible. He cannot determine whether he is
responsible for the crime charged or for a lesser offense.
At the trial, the defendant is not qualified to make
objections to evidence or to cross-examine witnesses.
He is unable to act as a lawyer would in the sentencing
process. In short, the assistance of a lawyer is essential
to a fair trial and, accordingly, is required by due
process of law.” Abe Krash, assistant to Abe Fortas
March 18, 1963
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 9-0 in Gideon’s favor.
Justice Hugo Black: “Lawyers in criminal courts are necessities,
not luxuries.“
Miranda Card
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and Due Process
Two related issues are in play:
A) Upon Tsarnaev’s arrest he was not advised of
his Miranda rights (which include the right to
counsel as determined in Gideon v.
Wainwright)
B) Tsarnaev asked for an attorney multiple times
while he was being questioned in the hospital;
his request was denied under the “public
safety” exception