DIFTCL D3 S0E016: Amendment VI, Gideon’s Paper Promise
カートのアイテムが多すぎます
カートに追加できませんでした。
ウィッシュリストに追加できませんでした。
ほしい物リストの削除に失敗しました。
ポッドキャストのフォローに失敗しました
ポッドキャストのフォロー解除に失敗しました
-
ナレーター:
-
著者:
Gideon guaranteed you a lawyer. It did not guarantee that lawyer would have time to read your file.
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) held that the Sixth Amendment requires appointed counsel for indigent defendants facing serious criminal charges, and it was rightly celebrated as one of the great expansions of American criminal procedure. The right is real. The delivery is uneven.
This episode runs Authorize, Constrain, Gap on the assistance of counsel. Authorize: in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. Constrain: Gideon made it binding on the states. Strickland v. Washington (1984) then set the standard for when counsel is so deficient that a conviction cannot stand, requiring both deficient performance and prejudice to the outcome.
Then the Gap, and it is a wide one. Strickland’s prejudice prong is demanding, and courts apply a strong presumption that counsel’s choices were strategic. Meanwhile public defender caseloads in many jurisdictions run into the hundreds per attorney per year, far beyond widely cited workload standards. A structural funding problem gets litigated one defendant at a time, under a test built to detect individual attorney error rather than systemic underinvestment.
The episode also covers the confrontation right and Crawford v. Washington (2004), which reoriented the analysis around testimonial statements.
The right to counsel is guaranteed. The resources that make it meaningful are not, and the episode spends its time on the distance between those two facts as it shows up in caseloads and funding rather than in doctrine.
Cases discussed- Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984)
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004)
Citations verified against CourtListener.
Season 0 of DIFTCL: Doctrine Deep Dives runs one episode per amendment, twenty to thirty minutes each: what the text authorizes, how doctrine constrains it, and where the gap falls.
Browse the full season
Narration is AI-generated. Legal education, not legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.