Cases change America
Cases change America
Gideon VS Wainwright (1963)
The turning point occurred in 1961 and it was performed as the form of amending American Constitution, beginning with the arrest of Clarence Earl Gideon, a guy from Florida who just had 8-years education. 美国实行中小学十二年制免费义务教育，吉迪恩的学历为八年级Gideon was sued with the breaking and entering into a pool hall, stealing the money from the vending machines. At that time it was a felony under Florida law. Without money to pay for the lawyer, he tried to request a“free lawyer” but was rebutted because Florida only offered lawyers to the cases involved in death penalty. As a result, Gideon could only defense himself. Although he has tried his best, but lack of logic and sequence, his stratums were not trustworthy and finally Gideon was sentenced for a 5 years prison life.
Gideon has good-qualified virtues—persistence and courage. Gideon filed a habeas corpus petition to the Florida Supreme Court, stating the unfairness of not having a lawyer, challenging the conviction the jury and the judge had made and questioning the meaning of American Constitutional rights. 吉迪恩声称，他因贫困而被州法院无理剥夺了宪法第六条修正案规定的律师辩护权。此外，依照宪法第十四条修正案的规定，各州政府“不经正当法律程序，不得剥夺任何人的生命、自由或财产”。因此，佛罗里达州法院违反了正当程序原则，判决是不公正的。Although Florida Supreme Court denied his petition, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review Gideon’s case in 1963.
Justice Hugo Black contributed Gideon’s final success. Justice Black stated that “reason and reflection require us to recognize that in our adversary system of criminal justice, any person haled into court, who is too poor to hire a lawyer, cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him.” “在我们抗辩式的刑事审判体制中，任何一个被指控的被告，如果因贫穷请不起律师，就不会受到公正的审判，除非法院给他指派一个律师。对我们来说，这是显而易见的真理。”“在刑事法院，律师是必需品，而非奢侈品。”
The court proposed the sixth amendment for constitution, which indicated” in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence." What’s more, in Gideon, the court took further for this jurisprudence, asking the amendment to provide defense attorneys to any indigent criminal defendant charged with a felony.
This legendary case changed the American trail history, shocked lot of people and made the lawyers no longer be the luxuries for the wealth but be the necessities for poor. 吉迪恩这个无权无势、文化不高、一贫如洗的潦倒穷汉，大胆上诉最高法院，挑战刑事审判程序的故事，在全美各地引起了很大震撼。Gideon was calling for everyone to protect his or her own benefits and asked for the deservrable rights stated in the Constitution. 1972年吉迪恩病逝后，美国民权组织出资捐赠了一块大理石墓碑，为这位在美国宪政史上留下独特痕迹的小人物树碑立传。碑文摘自吉迪恩《赤贫人申诉书》中的一句话：“我相信，每一个时代都会发现法律的改善”。此语虽然平淡无华，但却体现了一个朴素而深刻的宪政原则：法律只有与时俱进，不断改善，才能在不同的时代和历史条件下，在不同的社会阶层和利益集团之间维持一种微妙的平衡，缓和社会矛盾，促进社会公正。
But this case’s effect never stopped. After the legal statement was approved, it actually raised some finical, social and moral issues.
Pros for the settlement of laws
1. Emphasize the human rights and nominally gave equal rights to the poor.
2. Actually shows the spirit of the declaration of independence.
Cons for the settlement of laws
1. According to the existing data, we could see that the appeals that were handed in in the form of “In Forma Pauperis” already have a very low opportunity to be formally tried. So the economic problems that are brought by the defender system would even make a further deduction on the hearing rate.
2. Defense system would be regarded as a sort of “criminal welfare” by the criminals because it implicitly shows the sympathy of the government and society. This would make the criminals feel less guilty when committing crimes, which would help increase the crime rate.
3. This system would bring harsh financial burden to the government, especially to the poor and middle bourgeoisies. America employs the regressive taxing policy, which means that the poor people have to pay a big part of their income as tax to the government. If the tax is too high for the poor and middle class, they would have to commit crime to make a living, which means the increase in total crime rate.
4. The government employed lawyers are always not as competent as the hired lawyers. The general situation now is that the government employed lawyers only make 1/10 the money hired lawyers generally make. So those lawyers that are willing to work for the government are either callow and verdant or senile and zealless. So can those lawyers really defend the right for the poor people? Isn’t the defender system only existing nominally?
6. After the defender system is set, the right of poor people now is defended. However, what should the government do with the criminals who was unfairly treated before? What if the criminal has already been in the prison for his entire life? What if the criminal has just been killed? So if the defender system is implemented, the US government has to practice new trials for millions of criminals they treated unfairly before. 此案一出，全美各地监狱里有数千名在押犯人，因当年受审时同样没有律师为他们辩护，后来都获得了重新开庭复审的机会，多数人的最终判决是无罪释放。吉迪恩一时成为深受狱中犯人仰慕的英雄好汉。可无论如何，总会有人已经被冤枉，无法改变，那么又如何体现公平呢？
7. What is the division line for “poor people”? If the government employs the defender system, many people would take advantage of the government; they would claim to be incapable to hire lawyers and force the government to support them.
8. With such low salaries, government employed lawyers would lack not only passion and motivation but also the money for basic office equipment’s and investigation.
9. Although the defender system is designed for defending the right for the US people, but the action of helping the criminal would also be misunderstood by the public, which would not only incur conflict between people and government but also intensify the contradiction between people and lawyers.
10. The government employed lawyers could only deal with regular criminal laws. They cannot cope with civil law and administrative law. So when the case is twisted, the poor people still has to hire corresponding lawyers to defend for them.
Gideon VS Wainwright (1963)
The turning point occurred in 1961 and it was performed as the form of amending American Constitution, beginning with the arrest of Clarence Earl Gideon, a guy from Florida who just had 8-years education. 美国实行中小学十二年制免费义务教育，吉迪恩的学历为八年级Gideon was sued with the breaking and entering into a pool hall, stealing the money from the vending machines. At that time it was a felony under Florida law. Without money to pay for the lawyer, he tried to request a“free lawyer” but was rebutted because Florida only offered lawyers to the cases involved in death penalty. As a result, Gideon could only defense himself. Although he has tried his best, but lack of logic and sequence, his stratums were not trustworthy and finally Gideon was sentenced for a 5 years prison life.
Gideon has good-qualified virtues—persistence and courage. Gideon filed a habeas corpus petition to the Florida Supreme Court, stating the unfairness of not having a lawyer, challenging the conviction the jury and the judge had made and questioning the meaning of American Constitutional rights. 吉迪恩声称，他因贫困而被州法院无理剥夺了宪法第六条修正案规定的律师辩护权。此外，依照宪法第十四条修正案的规定，各州政府“不经正当法律程序，不得剥夺任何人的生命、自由或财产”。因此，佛罗里达州法院违反了正当程序原则，判决是不公正的。Although Florida Supreme Court denied his petition, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review Gideon’s case in 1963.
Justice Hugo Black contributed Gideon’s final success. Justice Black stated that “reason and reflection require us to recognize that in our adversary system of criminal justice, any person haled into court, who is too poor to hire a lawyer, cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him.” “在我们抗辩式的刑事审判体制中，任何一个被指控的被告，如果因贫穷请不起律师，就不会受到公正的审判，除非法院给他指派一个律师。对我们来说，这是显而易见的真理。”“在刑事法院，律师是必需品，而非奢侈品。”
The court proposed the sixth amendment for constitution, which indicated” in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence." What’s more, in Gideon, the court took further for this jurisprudence, asking the amendment to provide defense attorneys to any indigent criminal defendant charged with a felony.
This legendary case changed the American trail history, shocked lot of people and made the lawyers no longer be the luxuries for the wealth but be the necessities for poor. 吉迪恩这个无权无势、文化不高、一贫如洗的潦倒穷汉，大胆上诉最高法院，挑战刑事审判程序的故事，在全美各地引起了很大震撼。Gideon was calling for everyone to protect his or her own benefits and asked for the deservrable rights stated in the Constitution. 1972年吉迪恩病逝后，美国民权组织出资捐赠了一块大理石墓碑，为这位在美国宪政史上留下独特痕迹的小人物树碑立传。碑文摘自吉迪恩《赤贫人申诉书》中的一句话：“我相信，每一个时代都会发现法律的改善”。此语虽然平淡无华，但却体现了一个朴素而深刻的宪政原则：法律只有与时俱进，不断改善，才能在不同的时代和历史条件下，在不同的社会阶层和利益集团之间维持一种微妙的平衡，缓和社会矛盾，促进社会公正。
But this case’s effect never stopped. After the legal statement was approved, it actually raised some finical, social and moral issues.
Pros for the settlement of laws
1. Emphasize the human rights and nominally gave equal rights to the poor.
2. Actually shows the spirit of the declaration of independence.
Cons for the settlement of laws
1. According to the existing data, we could see that the appeals that were handed in in the form of “In Forma Pauperis” already have a very low opportunity to be formally tried. So the economic problems that are brought by the defender system would even make a further deduction on the hearing rate.
2. Defense system would be regarded as a sort of “criminal welfare” by the criminals because it implicitly shows the sympathy of the government and society. This would make the criminals feel less guilty when committing crimes, which would help increase the crime rate.
3. This system would bring harsh financial burden to the government, especially to the poor and middle bourgeoisies. America employs the regressive taxing policy, which means that the poor people have to pay a big part of their income as tax to the government. If the tax is too high for the poor and middle class, they would have to commit crime to make a living, which means the increase in total crime rate.
4. The government employed lawyers are always not as competent as the hired lawyers. The general situation now is that the government employed lawyers only make 1/10 the money hired lawyers generally make. So those lawyers that are willing to work for the government are either callow and verdant or senile and zealless. So can those lawyers really defend the right for the poor people? Isn’t the defender system only existing nominally?
6. After the defender system is set, the right of poor people now is defended. However, what should the government do with the criminals who was unfairly treated before? What if the criminal has already been in the prison for his entire life? What if the criminal has just been killed? So if the defender system is implemented, the US government has to practice new trials for millions of criminals they treated unfairly before. 此案一出，全美各地监狱里有数千名在押犯人，因当年受审时同样没有律师为他们辩护，后来都获得了重新开庭复审的机会，多数人的最终判决是无罪释放。吉迪恩一时成为深受狱中犯人仰慕的英雄好汉。可无论如何，总会有人已经被冤枉，无法改变，那么又如何体现公平呢？
7. What is the division line for “poor people”? If the government employs the defender system, many people would take advantage of the government; they would claim to be incapable to hire lawyers and force the government to support them.
8. With such low salaries, government employed lawyers would lack not only passion and motivation but also the money for basic office equipment’s and investigation.
9. Although the defender system is designed for defending the right for the US people, but the action of helping the criminal would also be misunderstood by the public, which would not only incur conflict between people and government but also intensify the contradiction between people and lawyers.
10. The government employed lawyers could only deal with regular criminal laws. They cannot cope with civil law and administrative law. So when the case is twisted, the poor people still has to hire corresponding lawyers to defend for them.
