Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal
Abstract
The note examines the disparity between the Sixth Amendment's promise of counsel for indigent defendants and the realities of its implementation, arguing that while landmark cases like Gideon v. Wainwright established the right to appointed counsel in state criminal proceedings, significant gaps remain in ensuring effective representation. The analysis highlights systemic issues such as inadequate funding, excessive caseloads, and limited access to resources, which undermine the fairness of criminal trials. The note advocates for increased funding, reduced caseloads, and clearer standards for effective assistance of counsel to fulfill the constitutional guarantee of equal justice.
Disciplines
Criminal Law | Criminal Procedure | Law | Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility | Legal Profession | Supreme Court of the United States
Recommended Citation
Amanda M. Hornung,
The Paper Tiger of Gideon v. Wainwright and the Evisceration of the Right to Appointment of Legal Counsel for Indigent Defendants,
3
Cardozo Pub. L. Pol’y & Ethics J.
495
(2005).
Available at:
https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/cplpej/vol3/iss2/13
Included in
Criminal Law Commons, Criminal Procedure Commons, Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons, Legal Profession Commons, Supreme Court of the United States Commons