Johnson v. Zerbst

Appellant
John A. Johnson
Appellee
Fred G. Zerbst, Warden, U.S. Penitentiary, Atlanta, Georgia
Appellant's Claim
That the court must appoint lawyers to represent indigent defendants in federal criminal cases.
Chief Lawyer for Appellant
Elbert P. Tuttle
Chief Lawyer for Appellee
Bates Booth
Justices for the Court
Hugo Lafayette Black (writing for the Court), Pierce Butler, James Clark McReynolds, Stanley Forman Reed
Justices Dissenting
Louis D. Brandeis, Charles Evans Hughes, Owen Josephus Roberts, Harlan FiskeStone (Benjamin N. Cardozo did not participate)
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
23 May 1938
Decision
The Supreme Court held that counsel must be appointed for all defendants in federal criminal trials who cannot afford to hire their own attorneys.
Significance
Johnson raised the standard set in 1932 by Powell v. Alabama, in which the Court held that counsel must be appointed to all indigent criminal defendants facing the possibility of the death sentence in federal court.
On 21 November 1934, John Johnson was arrested in Charleston, South Carolina,for possessing and passing four counterfeit $20 bills--a federal offense. Atthe time, he was enlisted in the Marine Corps. He was indicted on 21 January1935 and tried and sentenced two days later to four and one-half years in prison. He began to serve his sentence two days later, when he was transportedto the federal penitentiary in Atlanta, Georgia.
While he was serving his sentence, Johnson filed a petition for habeas corpus--a request to be released on the grounds that he had been illegally detained--with the federal distinct court. Johnson cited as the basis for hispetition the fact that he had been tried, convicted, and sentenced without benefit of counsel. Johnson, who lacked the funds to hire his own attorney, hadasked the district attorney to appoint a lawyer to represent him at his trial. But after the district attorney told him that South Carolina only appointed counsel to indigent defendants when they were facing the possibility of capital punishment, the issue was dropped. Asked by the court if he had a lawyer, Johnson merely answered no and agreed that he was ready for trial.
Now, in his habeas corpus petition, Johnson claimed that he had been deprived of his right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment, which reads: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to have theAssistance of Counsel for his defence." When the district court denied his petition, he appealed to the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which affirmed this decision. Johnson's next step was to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Supreme Court Requires That Counsel Be Appointed
The Supreme Court agreed with Johnson. For much of the nation's history, theright to counsel meant that everyone who could afford to hire a lawyer had aright to do so. Then, in Powell v. Alabama (1932), the Supreme Court had ruled that state courts were obliged--under the Fourteenth Amendment's DueProcess Clause--to provide counsel for those indigent defendants facing thedeath penalty. Now, writing for the Court, Justice Black spelled out a more expansive interpretation of procedural due process under the Constitution:

[The right to counsel] is one of the safeguards of the Sixth Amendment deemed necessary to insure fundamental human rights of life and liberty . .. It embodies a realistic recognition of the obvious truth that the averagedefendant does not have the professional legal skill to protect himself whenbrought before a tribunal with the power to take his life or liberty, whereinthe prosecution is represented by experienced and learned counsel . . . The" . . . right to he heard would be, in many cases, of little avail if it didnot comprehend the right to be heard by counsel."

Black added that Johnson's failure to request a lawyer directly from the trial court did not amount to a waiver of his right. Rather, in order to waive the right to counsel intelligently, a defendant must first be told that he has the right, then deliberately choose to waive it
The right to counsel in state courts was later expanded in Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), which granted indigent defendants the right to appointed counsel in all felony cases, and in Argersinger v. Hamlin (1972), whichextended this guarantee to cover misdemeanor offenses and all crimes of a lesser order. The issue of informed right to counsel came to the forefront mostprominently in Miranda v. Arizona (1966), in which the Court determined that the right begins at the time a criminal suspect becomes subject to police interrogation. Miranda was perhaps the high-water mark of the Court's "due process revolution," in which criminal procedure was radically overhauled to ensure that state criminal defendants received the benefits of the Bill of Rights. Johnson v. Zerbst was an important step along the way.
Related Cases

• Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932).
  
• Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963).
  
• Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).
  
• Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25 (1972).

Federal Court of Appeals
The U.S. court of appeals is the second level of the federal court system where parties dissatisfied with the U.S. district court's decisions can have them reviewed. The U.S. Supreme Court is the third level of the federal judicialsystem where parties can have the decisions by the courts of appeals reviewed. The federal courts of appeals also hear and review decisions by the U.S. Tax Court and some federal administrative agencies. Judges for the courts of appeals receive life appointments by the president with help and approval of the Senate and each court has at least six judges.
This branch of the federal court system includes 12 regional courts of appeals as well as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. These regional courts are divided into circuits and the First through Eleventh Circuits consist of three or more states each. In addition, there is the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which handles appeals in the District ofColumbia and has jurisdiction over many departments of the federal government.
Sources
The Federal Judiciary Home Page. http://www.uscourts.gov.