In Johnson v. Zerbst (1938) the Supreme Court ruled that the 6th Amendment entitles one to legal counsel when charged with a crime, unless the defendent explicitly waives that right. The petitioner and a Mr. Bridwell, both Marine Corps servicemen, were arrested in Charleston, South Carolina in November 1934 for possessing twenty-one counterfeit $20 bills and passing four of them. They were indicted in US District Court in Charleston and sat in jail awaiting trial as neither could afford bail. Johnston and Bridwell were found guilty on January 23, 1935 and sentenced to four years and six months in USP Atlanta. Neither had an attorney to defend them and both immediately pled guilty to the charges.Neither man was a native of South Carolina and had no familial or other ties to the state, nor did they have any money or anything beyond a primary school education. They had no prior criminal history. The trial judge had never been requested to appoint counsel, although the DA did and he said that South Carolina law did not mandate a public defender unless a capital crime was committed. The DA also said he'd never been requested to appoint counsel. The assistant DA said that Bridwell cross-examined witnesses in court and conducted himself adequately despite a lack of formal legal training.
After being transported to the Federal penitentary, both were kept in isolation from other prisoners for the first 16 days, per standard practice, and during this time did not make any request to prison staff to consult an attorney or file an appeal. They later appealed and were denied habeas corpus by the district judge and the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court.Justice Hugo Black wrote the 6-2 majority opinion where he stated that the 6th Amendment expressly requires one to have legal counsel in a Federal court case unless the defendant waives that right. Justice McReynolds dissented on the grounds that he agreed with the 6th Circuit Court and Justice Butler believed the defendant had waived his right to legal counsel.Zerbst applied only to Federal cases as the Supreme Court in this era generally held that the Bill of Rights did not apply to the states and it was not incorporated onto the latter until Gideon v. Wainwright 24 years later.
>>18291875>and he said that South Carolina law did not mandate a public defender unless a capital crime was committed.and if you were black you probably didn't even get that
>>18291884fuck off LBJfag
>>18291903>I fucking hate the constitutionYou’re free to move to North Korea, my guyI won’t stop you
>>18291875>although the DA did and he said that South Carolina law did not mandate a public defender unless a capital crime was committedIt was a Federal case though I assume there must have been some concession to states rights by utilizing some of the the host state's sentencing rules.
