90 HELP PLEASE Research a past Supreme Court decision. Write at least one paragraph about the issue and the final ruling concerning it. Use your own words to summarize what you have learned, but you will need to include a work cited section at the end of your report. Don't forget to include the name of the court case and the date of the decision.

Clarence Earl Gideon was an unlikely hero.  He was a man with an eighth-grade education who ran away from home when he was in middle school.  He spent much of his early adult life as a drifter, spending time in and out of prisons for nonviolent crimes.

Gideon was charged with breaking and entering with the intent to commit a misdemeanor, which is a felony under Florida law.  At trial, Gideon appeared in court without an attorney.  In open court, he asked the judge to appoint counsel for him because he could not afford an attorney.  The trial judge denied Gideon’s request because Florida law only permitted the appointment of counsel for poor defendants charged with capital offenses.

At trial, Gideon represented himself – he made an opening statement to the jury, cross-examined the prosecution’s witnesses, presented witnesses in his own defense, declined to testify himself, and made arguments emphasizing his innocence.  Despite his efforts, the jury found Gideon guilty and he was sentenced to five years imprisonment.

Gideon sought relief from his conviction by filing a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Florida Supreme Court.  In his petition, Gideon challenged his conviction and sentence on the ground that the trial judge’s refusal to appoint counsel violated Gideon’s constitutional rights.  The Florida Supreme Court denied Gideon’s petition.

Gideon next filed a handwritten petition in the Supreme Court of the United States.  The Court agreed to hear the case to resolve the question of whether the right to counsel guaranteed under the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution applies to defendants in state court.

Explanation:

hope this helps!!! :

it was certainly a debatable decision, mainly because it was based primarily on political - and not on legal or social - views. since the congress at that time was led by members of the republican party, and the territory that the tribes wanted to turn into an exclusively indian state was predominantly democratic, the proposal (as expressed in the constitution) did not succeed, but the constitution itself proved to be of crucial importance in the creation of the state of oklahoma, and, most importantly, it guaranteed the involvement of representatives of the indian tribes in the government of the future joint state.  

as a member of congress, i would have voted to ratify the constitution, or at least to have it tabled. ignoring it was an interested and partial decision.  

calvin taught his followers that human beings needed to follow strict rules to overcome their nature and do good. second choice