|
|
 |
 |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES FOR LOUISIANA JUSTICE COALITION WEBSITE
I. State v. Peart, 621 So.2d 780 (La. 1993)
In Peart, a young Louisiana public defender on the eve of trial stood up and said, "I am ineffective." The public defender's client (Leonard Peart) was facing the awesome possibility of spending the rest of his life in prison, yet the public defender performed no investigation and just barely spoke to his client before he was to begin the trial.
The public defender understood and cared about the importance of his role but knew his caseloads were many times higher than any acceptable standard, knew he had no investigators or experts to assist in the case, knew he was paid too little to provide these resources for himself, and he knew if he didn't stand up, nothing would ever change and poor people like his client would continue to suffer injustice.
The Louisiana Supreme Court agreed with the young public defender, and stated if such deficiencies exist then the court cannot allow any trials to go forward, until the problems are fixed and defendants are protected by effective counsel. The Supreme Court also urged lawmakers to make lasting changes:
If legislative action is not forthcoming and indigent defense reform does not take place, this Court, in the exercise of its constitutional and inherent power and supervisory jurisdiction, may find it necessary to employ the more intrusive and specific measures it has thus far avoided...
Peart, 621 So.2d at 791.
II. In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1, 87 S.Ct. 1428, 18 L.Ed.2d 527 (1967)
In Gault, Gerald "Jerry" Gault, an Arizona teenager, was arrested for making prank calls to a neighbor and sentenced to 6 years in juvenile prison (until his 21st birthday). He was 15 years-old. Jerry was found delinquent and sentenced without a lawyer. Jerry's family appealed his case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, believing Jerry deserved the legal representation not allowed by the State of Arizona.
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed with Jerry's family, reversing the Arizona courts and changing the nature of juvenile court forever. In Gault, the Court ruled that children the constitutional right to an attorney. The U.S. Supreme Court was furious at the injustice Jerry suffered, and wrote, "Under our Constitution, the condition of being a boy does not justify a kangaroo court." Gault, 387 U.S. 1, 28, 87 S.Ct. 1428, 1444, 18 L.Ed.2d 527, 546. The U.S. Supreme Court further wrote:
The juvenile needs the assistance of counsel to cope with problems of law, to make skilled inquiry into the facts, to insist upon regularity of the proceedings, and to ascertain whether he has a defense and to prepare and submit it. The child "requires the guiding hand of counsel at every step in the proceedings against him."
Gault, 387 U.S. 1, 36, 87 S.Ct. 1428, 1448, 18 L.Ed.2d 527, 551.
III. Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335; 83 S.Ct. 792; 9 L.Ed.2d 799 (1963)
Clarence Earl Gideon was charged with a crime he did not commit, and the State of Florida refused to provide him an attorney to defend himself. He was convicted and sentenced to five years in state prison. Claiming innocence and believing he had the right to an attorney, Mr. Gideon wrote his appeal by hand to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Court wrote:
The right of one charged with crime to counsel may not be deemed fundamental and essential to fair trials in some countries, but it is in ours. From the very beginning, our state and national constitutions and laws have laid great emphasis on procedural and substantive safeguards designed to assure fair trials before impartial tribunals in which every defendant stands equal before the law. This noble ideal cannot be realized if the poor man charged with crime has to face his accusers without a lawyer to assist him.
Gideon, 372 U.S. 335, 344, 83 S.Ct. 792, 796-797, 9 L.Ed.2d 799, 805.
For the first time, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized the right to counsel as fundamental. Gideon guarantees everyone in the United States the right to counsel in criminal court. "That government hires lawyers to prosecute and defendants who have the money hire lawyers to defend are the strongest indications of the widespread belief that lawyers in criminal courts are necessities, not luxuries." Gideon, 372 U.S. 335, 344, 83 S.Ct. 792, 796, 9 L.Ed.2d 799, 805.
|
|
|
|
|
