Mandate from the United States Supreme Court, Page 3
Page 3
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
JULY TERM, A. D. 1961
MONDAY, OCTOBER 30, 1961
CLARENCE EARL GIDEON, **
Petitioner, **
vs. **
H. G. COCHRAN, JR., Director, **
Division of Corrections, **
Respondent. **
The above-named petitioner has filed a petition for writ
of habeas corpus in the above causes, and upon consideration thereof,
it is ordered that said petition be and the same is hereby denied.
A True Copy
TEST:
Guyte P. McCord
Clerk Supreme Court.
Gideon Petitioner v. Wainwright Respondent, Page 1
Page 1
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING PETITION AND, IF
FILED, DETERMINED.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
JANUARY TERM, A. D. 1963
CLARENECE EARL GIDEON,
Petitioner,
vs.
LOUIE L. WAINWRIGHT, Director,
Division of Corrections,
Respondent.
CASE NO. 31,116
Opinion filed May 15, 1963
Case of original jurisdiction – Habeas Corpus
Clarence Earl Gideon, in proper person, for Petitioner
Richard W. Ervin, Attorney General, and Bruce Jacob, Assistant
Attorney General, for Respondent
THORNAL, J.
Following our denial of petitioner’s application for a
writ of habeas corpus this cause was considered by the Supreme
court of the United States on a writ of certiorari. Our judgment
was reversed and the cause was remanded for further action not
inconsistent with the opinion of the United States Court.
The matter now recurs for consideration pursuant to
the mandate of the Supreme Court of the United States.
By his post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas
corpus, Gideon alleged that at his trial on a felony information
he was insolvent and requested the assistance of counsel. His
request was denied. His petition failed to allege that he was
unable to defend himself adequately because of a lack of
