Which Supreme Court case established the right to counsel for defendants who cannot afford one?

• A. Gideon v. Wainwright
• B. Miranda v. Arizona
• C. Mapp v. Ohio
• D. Heller v. District of Columbia

Answer: (A)

Right to counsel for defendants who cannot afford an attorney is a fundamental safeguard that helps ensure a fair criminal trial. The Supreme Court ruling in Gideon v. Wainwright held that the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee of the right to counsel applies to state prosecutions through the Fourteenth Amendment, so if a defendant cannot afford an attorney, the government must provide one. This decision established that effective legal representation is essential for protecting the defendant’s rights and ensuring due process, and it overruled prior limits that allowed some defendants to go without appointed counsel.

Other cases address different aspects of criminal procedure: Miranda v. Arizona focuses on informing suspects of their rights during interrogation, not on trial-level counsel; Mapp v. Ohio concerns the exclusionary rule about illegally obtained evidence; Heller v. District of Columbia deals with gun rights under the Second Amendment.