Consider the summary of Gideon v. Wainwright. Determine first the constitutional amendments on which the Supreme Court based their decision, and second, what change in interpretation this ruling demonstrated. Clarence Gideon, born in 1910, was by his own admission a career criminal. He dropped out of school during the eighth grade and began traveling the country by rail, engaging in what he referred to as a life of “drinking, gambling, and stealing.” In 1961, he was arrested for breaking into the Bay Harbor Pool Hall in Panama City, Florida. At his arraignment on burglary charges, he explained to the judge that he had no money and requested the court appoint an attorney to represent him; his request was denied because the charges against him, although serious, would not result in a conviction for a capital offense. As did several other states at the time, Florida only provided legal counsel to those defendants who could not afford counsel and were charged with an offense that, if convicted, might result in the death penalty. Gideon was convicted of burglary and sentenced to five years in prison. Working from the prison library, he first appealed to the Florida Supreme Court, claiming that his constitutional rights had been violated during trial; when the state’s highest court denied his claim, he appealed to the U. S. Supreme Court. In 1963, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that Gideon should have been provided legal counsel and that failing to do so violated two constitutional amendments, one of which was included in the Bill of Rights and the second enacted shortly after the Civil War.

-The U. S. Supreme Court ruling found that Gideon’s conviction violated the Sixth Amendment because he was denied legal counsel, as well as the Fourteenth Amendment, which extends to the states the due process provisions of the Bill of Rights.
-The U. S. Supreme Court ruling found that Gideon’s conviction violated the First Amendment right to free speech because the Florida court rejected his appeal and he was denied legal counsel, as well as the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
-The U. S. Supreme Court ruling found that Gideon’s conviction violated the Sixth Amendment because he was denied legal counsel as well as the Fourteenth Amendment, which extends to the states the due process provisions of the Bill of Rights.
-The U. S. Supreme Court ruling found that Gideon’s conviction did not violate any constitutional amendments and that his conviction should stand.