Question

What was the impact of the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Gideon v Wainwright (1963)? (SS.7.C.3.12)

States could no longer have racial quotas as part of their affirmative action programs.

Southern states could no longer have racially segregated public schools.

Suspects had to be told of their right to have an attorney present and to remain during police interrogations.

Poor defendants accused of serious crimes had to be provided with a state-sponsored public defender

Answer 1

c, suspects had to be told of their right to have an attorney present and to remain during police interrogations because 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 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. So it’ll make sense to go with C

Answer 2

I think C

Step-by-step explanation:

The Gideon case focused on the 6th Amendment right to counsel (a lawyer) in state criminal cases. This judicial opinion on this case also strengthened the rights of the accused. This case focused on the 5th Amendment rights of due process and protection from self-incrimination.