Johnson v. Zerbst
Johnson v. Zerbst | |
---|---|
Holding | |
Since the Sixth Amendment constitutionally entitles one charged with crime to the assistance of counsel, compliance with this constitutional mandate is an essential jurisdictional prerequisite to a federal court's authority to deprive an accused of his life or liberty. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Black, joined by Hughes, Brandeis, Stone, Roberts |
Concurrence | Reed |
Dissent | McReynolds |
Dissent | Butler |
Cardozo took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. |
Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (1938), was a
Supreme Court involvement
The
Since the Sixth Amendment constitutionally entitles one charged with crime to the assistance of counsel, compliance with this constitutional mandate is an essential jurisdictional prerequisite to a federal court's authority to deprive an accused of his life or liberty. When this right is properly waived, the assistance of counsel is no longer a necessary element of the court's jurisdiction to proceed to conviction and sentence. If the accused, however, is not represented by counsel and has not competently and intelligently waived his constitutional right, the Sixth Amendment stands as a jurisdictional bar to a valid conviction and sentence depriving him of his life or his liberty.[3]
This set the precedent that defendants have the right to be represented by an attorney unless they waive their right to counsel knowing full well the potential consequences. This precedent, however, only made this right applicable to federal defendants and did not extend to defendants in trials under state jurisdiction. Assistance of counsel was held to be requisite to due process of law in state felony proceedings with the Gideon v. Wainwright decision in 1963.[4]
See also
References
External links
- Works related to Johnson v. Zerbst at Wikisource
- Text of Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (1938) is available from: Cornell CourtListener Findlaw Google Scholar Justia Library of Congress OpenJurist