Select Primary Sources
|
|
|
|
|
Clarence Earl Gideon: "Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus" to Florida Supreme Court
I Clarence Earl Gideon, informs This court that I am a pauper with out funds are any possibility of obtaining financeable aid, and I Beg of this court to Listen and act upon my plea.
On the 3rd day of June 1961 A.D. I was arrested and charged with the crime of Breaking and entering with the intent to committ a misdeamor to wit petty Larceny. And that I plead not guilty to this charge. That on the 4th day of August 1961 A.D.I was tried in court of BAY COUNTY the 14th DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE STATE OF FLORIDA and was found guilty as charge That on the 25th day of August 1961 A.D. was sentenced to a term of five years (5 yrs) in the State Prison.
I Clarence Earl Gideon, will show this court that I did not have a fair trial and was denied my constutional rights that is gurranteed by the constution and the Bill of rights by the United States Government.
I was without funds and without a attorney. I asked this court to appoint to me a attorney but they denied me that right. I told this court of the 14th District of Florida County of Bay, That United State Supreme Court of the United States of America had ruled that the State of Florida should see that even one who is tried for a felony charge should have legal counsel. But the Court ignored this Plea
I Clarence Earl Gideon, claim that I was denied that rights of the 4th 5th and 14th amendments of the Bill of rights.
I sent a petition from the County Jail of Bay County, to the United States District Court of Tallahassee Florida. But the sheriffs’ office and officials refuse to let it go out which is contrary to of the laws of The united States Government.
I Clarence Earl Gideon, Beg of this court to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus and to set aside the 5 yr sentence that I have by the Court of Bay County 14th District in and fro the State of Florida and to give me the aid that I need
signed
Clarence Earl Gideon
Clarence Earl Gideon: "Petition for a Writ of Certiorari" to U.S. Supreme Court
Comes now the petitioner, Clarence Earl Gideon, a citizen of the United States of America, in proper person, and appearing as his own counsel. Who petitions this Honorable Court for a Writ of Certiorari directed to the Supreme Court of the state of Florida. To review the order and judgement of the court below denying the petitioner a writ of Habeus Corpus.
Petitioner submits that the Supreme Court of the United States has the authority and jurisdiction to review the final judgement of the Supreme Court of the state of Florida the highest court of the state. Under sec. 344 (B) Title 28 U.S.C.A. and Because the "Due process clause" of the fourteenth admendment of the constitution and the fifth and sixth articales of the Bill of rights has been violated. Furthermore, the decision of the court below denying the petitioner a Writ of Habeus Corpus is also inconsistent and adverse to its own previous decisions in paralled cases.
Attached hereto and made a part of this petition is a true copy of the petition for a Writ of Habeus Corpus as presented to the Florida Supreme Court. Petitioner asks this Honorable Court to consider the same arguments and authorities cited in the petition for Writ of Habeus Corpus before the Florida Supreme Court. In consideration of this petition for a Writ of Certiorari.
The Supreme Court of Florida did not write any opinion. Order of that Court denying petition for Writ of Habeus Corpus dated October 30, 1961, are attached hereto and made a part of this petition.
Petitioner contends that he has been deprived of due process of law Habeus Corpus petition alleging that the lower state court has decided a federal question of substance, in a way not in accord with the applicable decisions of this Honorable Court. When at the time of the petitioners trial. He ask the lower court for the aid of counsel. The court refused this aid. Petitioner told the court that this court had made decision to the effect that all citizens tried for a felony crime should have aid of counsel.The lower court ignored this plea.
Petitioner alleges that prior to petitioners convictions and sentence for Breaking and Entering with the intent to commit petty Larceny, he had requested aid of counsel, that, at the time of his convictions and sentence, petitioner was without aid of counsel. That the Court refused and did not appoint counsel, and that he was incapable adequately of making his own defense. In consequence of which he was made to stand trial. Made a Prima Facia showing of denial of due process of law. (U.S.C.A. Const Amend. 14) William V. Kaiser vs. State of Missouri 65 ct. 363 Counsel must be assigned to the accused if he is unable to employ one, and is incapable adequately of making his own defense Tomkins vs State Missouri 65ct 370
On the 3rd June 1961 A. D. your petitioner was arrested for foresaid crime and convicted for same, Petitioner receive Trial and sentence without aid of counsel, your petitioner was deprived 'Due process of law'.
Petitioner, was deprived of due process of law in The Court below. Evidence in the lower court did not show that a crime of Breaking and Entering with the intent to commit Petty Larceny had been committed. Your petitioner was compelled to make his own defense, he was incapable adequately of making his own defense Petitioner did not plead no contender But that is what his trial amounted to.
Wherefore the premises considered it is respectfully contented that the decision of the court below was in error and the case should be review by this court, accordingly the writ prepared and prayed for should be issue.
IT is respectfully submitted
Clarence Earl Gideon
Mandate from the U.S. Supreme Court to the Florida Supreme Court (April 15, 1963)
GREETINGS;
WHEREAS, lately in the Supreme Court of the State of Florida, there came before you a cause between Clarence Earl Gideon, petitioner, and H. G. Cochran, Jr., Director, Division of Corrections, respondent, wherein the judgment of the said Supreme Court was duly entered on the 30th day of October A. D. 1961, as appears by an inspection of the transcript of the record of the said Supreme Court which was brought into the SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES by virtue of a writ of certiorari as provided by act of Congress.
AND WHEREAS, Louie L. Wainwright was substituted in the place of H. G. Cochran, Jr., pursuant to Rule 48 (3) as amended.
AND WHEREAS, in the October Term, 1962, the said cause came on to be heard before the SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES on the said transcript of record, and was argued by counsel:
ON CONISDERATION WHEREOF, it was ordered and adjudged on March 18, 1963, by this Court that the judgment of the said Supreme Court in this cause be reversed with costs, and that this cause be remanded to the Supreme Court of the State of the Florida for further proceedings not inconsistent with the opinion of this Court.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CAUSE IS REMANDED to you in order that such proceedings may be had in the said cause, in conformity with the judgment of this Court above stated, as accord with right and justice, and the Constitution and laws of the United States, the said writ of certiorari notwithstanding.
Witness the Honorable EARL WARREN, Chief Justice of the United States, the twelfth ---------- day of April --------- , in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixty-three.