supreme court cases

Gideon v Wainwright - Ammendment

The Sixth Amendment, the right to counsel.

Gideon v Wainwright - State law

Florida law did not require a lawyer.

Gideon v Wainwright

Clarence Earl Gideon was charged with breaking and entering in Florida. He could not afford a lawyer and requested one, but the court denied him, saying that Florida only provided attorneys in capital cases. Gideon defended himself and was convicted.

Gideon v Wainwright - Issue

Does the Sixth Amendment’s right to counsel apply to state courts through the Fourteenth Amendment?

Gideon v Wainwright - Decision

The court ruled in favor of Gideon. The vote was unanimous. The constitution is the most supreme law of the land, and we are guaranteed the right to counsel by it.

Wisconsin v Yoder

An Amish family was charged with not sending their kid to school, which is required in the state of Wisconsin until the age of 16.  In Amish life, children 13+ are sent out into the world to work and to recruit, and the family argued that this law went against their freedom of religion.

Wisconsin v Yoder - Amendment

First amendment allowing freedom of religion.

Wisconsin v Yoder - State Law

Wisconsin state law requires children to attend school until age 16.

Wisconsin v Yoder - Issue

Does requiring Amish children to attend school past 8th grade violate the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment?

Wisconsin v Yoder - Decision

The court unanimously decided against the state of Wisconsin and found that the families rights were violated. The Court found that forcing Amish children to attend high school would interfere with their religious beliefs and way of life, outweighing the state’s interest in required education.

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire

Walter Chaplinsky, a Jehovah’s Witness, was arrested for calling a city marshal insults. He was convicted under a New Hampshire law prohibiting offensive or derisive speech in public.

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire - Ammendment

The first amendment, freedom of speech

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire - State Law

New Hampshire’s law against offensive speech in public.

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire - Issue

Does a state law restricting certain forms of speech violate the First Amendment?

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire - Decision

A unanimous decision upheld Chaplinsky’s conviction, ruling that “fighting words” are not protected speech. Speech intended to incite violence is not protected under the First Amendment.

Escebedo v. Illinois

Danny Escobedo was arrested and interrogated without being allowed to see his lawyer, despite repeated requests. He eventually made self-incriminating statements that were used to convict him, which he may not have made if he had a lawyer.

Escebedo v. Illinois - Ammendment

The Sixth Amendment, right to counsel.

Escebedo v. Illinois - State Law

Illinois law allows police to interrogate suspects before granting access to legal counsel.

Escebedo v. Illinois - Issue

Does denying a suspect access to a lawyer during police interrogation violate the Sixth Amendment?

Escebedo v. Illinois - Decision

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Escebedo, as his rights were violated. The Court ruled that suspects have the right to counsel during police interrogations and that denying access to a lawyer violated the Sixth Amendment.

McKiever v. Pennsylvania

Joseph McKeiver, a juvenile, was charged with robbery and requested a jury trial, which was denied under Pennsylvania law.

McKiever v. Pennsylvania - Ammendment

The Sixth Amendment. The right to jury in a trial.

McKiever v. Pennsylvania - State Law

Pennsylvania’s juvenile court system did not provide jury trials.

McKiever v. Pennsylvania - Issue

Do juveniles have the constitutional right to a jury trial under the Sixth Amendment?

McKiever v. Pennsylvania - Decision

Pennsylvania won the case. The Court ruled that juvenile proceedings are different from adult criminal trials and that requiring jury trials in juvenile courts would undermine their purpose of rehabilitation.

Torasco v. Watkins

Roy Torcaso was denied a position as a notary public in Maryland because he refused to declare a belief in God, as required by state law.

Torasco v. Watkins - Ammendment

The First Amendment, The Establishment Clause.

Torasco v. Watkins - State Law

Maryland’s requirement that public officials declare belief in God.

Torasco v. Watkins - Issue

Does a state law requiring public officials to declare a belief in God violate the First Amendment?

Torasco v. Watkins - Decision

There was a unanimous decision in favor of Torcaso, striking down the law. The Court ruled that requiring a religious belief for public office violated the First Amendment.

Roe v Wade

Jane Roe (pseudonym) challenged a Texas law banning abortion except to save a woman’s life.

Roe v Wade - Ammendment

14th Amendment, right to privacy

Roe v Wade - State Law

Texas law banning abortion

Roe v Wade - Issue

Does the Constitution protect a woman's right to an abortion?

Roe v Wade - Decision

They ruled that abortion is a constitutional right. The Court ruled that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment includes a right to privacy, which also includes a woman’s decision to have an abortion.

Miranda v. Arizona

Ernesto Miranda was arrested and interrogated without being informed of his right to remain silent or have an attorney. He confessed, and his confession was used against him

Miranda v. Arizona - Ammendment

Fifth and Sixth Amendments.Right against self-incrimination and Right to counsel.

Miranda v. Arizona - State Law

Arizona law allows police to interrogate suspects without informing them of their rights

Miranda v. Arizona - Issue

Does failure to inform a suspect of their rights violate the Constitution?

Miranda v. Arizona - Decision

The majority ruled that suspects must be informed of their rights before interrogation. The Court established the "Miranda rights," ensuring that individuals are informed of their rights to remain silent and have legal counsel.

Terry v. Ohio

Police officer stopped and frisked John Terry without a warrant, suspecting he was planning a crime. Weapons were found, and Terry was convicted

Terry v. Ohio - Ammendment

The Fourth Amendment, Protection against unreasonable searches and seizures

Terry v. Ohio - Issue

Does a search and seizure violate the Fourth Amendment?

Terry v. Ohio - Decision

An 8-1 decision ruled that a search is constitutional if the officer has reasonable suspicion.

Sibro v. New York

Sibron was caught talking with known drug addicts. Police stopped and searched him, finding drugs.

Sibro v. New York - Ammendment

The Fourth Amendment, Protection against unreasonable searches and seizures

Sibro v. New York - State Law

New York’s “stop-and-frisk” law.

Sibro v. New York - Issue

Was this search constitutional?

Sibro v. New York - Decison

The decision was 8-1, ruling that the search was unconstitutional. The Court found that the officer had no probable cause to search Sibron simply for talking to drug addicts