Powell v. Alabama
- Decided
- November 7, 1932
- Docket
- 98, 99, and 100
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 4,979 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- concluding that the defendants “were not accorded the right of counsel in any substantial sense” under the circumstances of the case — People v. Gawlak (2019)
- holding that trial court’s failure to allow defendants time to secure counsel before trial “was a clear denial of due process” — State v. Cruz (2021)
- recognizing that due process guarantee of right to counsel extends to civil as well as criminal proceedings — IN RE: BellSouth Corporation - IN RE: Terry Price, Lehr, Middlebrooks, Price & Proctor, P.C. (2003)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
[*49] Mr. Justice Sutherland delivered the opinion of the Court.
These cases were argued together and submitted for decision as one case.
The petitioners, hereinafter referred to as defendants, are negroes charged with the crime of rape, committed upon the persons of two white girls. The crime is said to have been committed on March 25, 1931. The indictment was returned in a state Court of first instance on March 31, and the record recites that on the same day the defendants were arraigned and entered pleas otf not guilty. There is a further recital to the effect that upon the arraignment they were represented by counsel. But no counsel had been employed, and aside from a statement made by the trial judge several days later during a colloquy immediately preceding the trial, the record does not disclose when, or under what circumstances, an appointment of counsel was made, or who was appointed. . During the colloquy referred to, the trial judge, in response to a question, said that he had appointed all the members of the bar for the purpose of arraigning the defendants and then of course anticipated that the members of the bar would continue to help the defendants if no counsel appeared. Upon the argument here both sides accepted that as a correct statement of the facts concerning the matter.
Cite this
Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.