Criminal and civil law, and the steps of a trial

Grade 12 Social Studies Worksheet - Challenge Me

Circle the best answer.

1. Read this first

   Use this

   Card A. Constitution, Sixth Amendment (1791), last clause. Exact words (National Archives transcript): “to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.” Card B. Betts v. Brady (1942), as Justice Black quoted it in 1963 (the Court is explaining its earlier decision): “appointment of counsel is not a fundamental right, essential to a fair trial.” Betts left state courts to appoint a lawyer for a poor defendant only in some cases, for example a charge of a capital offense. Card C. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963, 9 to 0). Gideon was a state case from Florida. Exact words from Justice Black's opinion: “in our adversary system of criminal justice, any person haled into court, who is too poor to hire a lawyer, cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him.” The Court overruled Betts v. Brady.

2. 1.

   In 1942 the Court said counsel was not required in many state cases; in 1963 it said it was. Esme reads Cards A, B and C. What changed?

   • Gideon's facts were more serious than Betts's, so the earlier rule fit his case less well
   • The Sixth Amendment's words stayed the same; the Court's view of what a fair state trial requires changed
   • The Court found that the Sixth Amendment's words had meant free counsel from the start, so Betts misread the text
   • The Constitution was amended in between so that states had to provide counsel

3. Use this

   Card A. Constitution, Sixth Amendment (1791), last clause. Exact words (National Archives transcript): “to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.” Card C. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963, 9 to 0). Gideon was a state case from Florida. Exact words from Justice Black's opinion: “in our adversary system of criminal justice, any person haled into court, who is too poor to hire a lawyer, cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him.” The Court overruled Betts v. Brady. Card D. Constitution, Fourteenth Amendment (1868), Section 1, part. Exact words (National Archives transcript): “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”.

4. 2.

   Gideon was a case from Florida, a state. Which pair of cards explains how a Sixth Amendment right reached a state, Milo?

   • Card A alone, since the Sixth Amendment's words already bound the states when it was ratified in 1791
   • Neither pair, since a state may decide for itself what a fair trial requires of its own courts
   • Card D alone, since due process means a state must give a lawyer in any kind of case, civil or criminal
   • Card A names the right and Card D's due process words bind a State, so a state trial needs counsel

5. Use this

   Card B. Betts v. Brady (1942), as Justice Black quoted it in 1963 (the Court is explaining its earlier decision): “appointment of counsel is not a fundamental right, essential to a fair trial.” Betts left state courts to appoint a lawyer for a poor defendant only in some cases, for example a charge of a capital offense. Card C. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963, 9 to 0). Gideon was a state case from Florida. Exact words from Justice Black's opinion: “in our adversary system of criminal justice, any person haled into court, who is too poor to hire a lawyer, cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him.” The Court overruled Betts v. Brady.

6. 3.

   “Cards B and C show that every state refused lawyers to poor defendants before 1963,” says Ren. What do the cards show?

   • That Betts was wrong from the start, since Gideon overruled it in 1963
   • That Betts let states decide in many cases; they do not show what every state did
   • Nothing about states, since a Supreme Court opinion never reports what states did
   • That every state refused, since Betts allowed refusal and Gideon overruled it

7. Use this

   Card E. Stack v. Boyle (1951). Exact words from Chief Justice Vinson's opinion: “Bail set at a figure higher than an amount reasonably calculated to fulfill this purpose is 'excessive' under the Eighth Amendment.” The “purpose” in the opinion is assurance that the accused will stand trial and submit to sentence if found guilty. Card F (made up). A county court sets bail by a chart: $20,000 for every charge listed as a felony, with no change for the person. Lee Reyes is charged with a felony, has lived in the county for 30 years, has a job and has never missed a court date. The prosecutor says the chart treats everyone the same, so no one is singled out.

8. 4.

   The prosecutor says the bail chart in Card F treats everyone equally. Using Card E, which reply is strongest, Tala?

   • The chart is fine, since a felony charge is serious enough to justify the figure the court sets
   • The chart is unconstitutional, since a chart cannot be consistent with a bail decision
   • Equal treatment is not the test; the test is whether the figure exceeds what assures Lee returns
   • The chart fails, since the amount is more than Lee can pay

9. Use this

   Card G. Constitution, Seventh Amendment (1791). Exact words (National Archives transcript): “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved”. Card H. Federal court rules (summary in our words, from the U.S. Courts website). A federal court can hear a suit between citizens of different states only if more than $75,000 is in dispute. A suit that arises under a federal law, such as a federal civil rights law, can be brought in federal court for any amount. A court can also hear a suit asking only for an order, such as to stop an action, with no damages sought.

10. 5.

    “Federal courts hear only suits over $75,000, so the Seventh Amendment's twenty-dollar line never decides anything,” says Jun. Using Cards G and H, which reply is best?

    • It overstates: a federal-law suit can be filed for any amount, so a small one can raise the jury right
    • Wrong, since the $75,000 line replaced the Seventh Amendment's twenty-dollar line when Congress set it
    • Right, since Card G applies to suits between citizens of different states, as Card H describes
    • Right, since a federal suit has more than $75,000 in dispute, which is far above twenty dollars

11. Use this

    Card A. Constitution, Sixth Amendment (1791), last clause. Exact words (National Archives transcript): “to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.” Card B. Betts v. Brady (1942), as Justice Black quoted it in 1963 (the Court is explaining its earlier decision): “appointment of counsel is not a fundamental right, essential to a fair trial.” Betts left state courts to appoint a lawyer for a poor defendant only in some cases, for example a charge of a capital offense. Card C. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963, 9 to 0). Gideon was a state case from Florida. Exact words from Justice Black's opinion: “in our adversary system of criminal justice, any person haled into court, who is too poor to hire a lawyer, cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him.” The Court overruled Betts v. Brady.

12. 6.

    A lawyer argues Gideon covers every misdemeanor, quoting “any person haled into court.” Using only the cards, which reply would Kira find strongest?

    • The quotation settles it, since “any person” includes anyone charged with any offense in any court
    • The quotation is broad, but the holding came from a felony; the lawyer must show a misdemeanor is similar
    • Card B settles it the other way, since it says counsel is a right in a capital case, not a misdemeanor
    • The quotation is worthless, since a Supreme Court case settles just the exact facts that were before it

13. Use this

    Card I (written for this sheet). Reading X: the Constitution's rights of the accused guard a person whenever a government proceeding can take that person's liberty, whatever the proceeding is called. Reading Y: the rights of the accused guard a person only in a proceeding the law calls a criminal prosecution. Card J (made up). In the State of Oak, Case 1: the State sues Dana Marlow for a $400 civil penalty for filing a form late; if it goes unpaid, the State collects it like any debt. Case 2: a different Oak law also calls a $400 penalty civil, but says that if it goes unpaid the person serves up to 10 days in jail.

14. 7.

    Pia reads Cards I and J. Which case separates Reading X from Reading Y?

    • Case 1: Reading X applies too, since a government is the one suing and a government can punish
    • Case 2: only Reading X gives Dana the rights of the accused there, since jail can follow
    • Case 1: Reading Y applies, since $400 is more than twenty dollars and so a jury right is triggered
    • Neither, since both readings treat any case the State calls civil as civil

15. Use this

    Card I (written for this sheet). Reading X: the Constitution's rights of the accused guard a person whenever a government proceeding can take that person's liberty, whatever the proceeding is called. Reading Y: the rights of the accused guard a person only in a proceeding the law calls a criminal prosecution. Card J (made up). In the State of Oak, Case 1: the State sues Dana Marlow for a $400 civil penalty for filing a form late; if it goes unpaid, the State collects it like any debt. Case 2: a different Oak law also calls a $400 penalty civil, but says that if it goes unpaid the person serves up to 10 days in jail. Card K. In re Winship (1970). A New York family court judge found, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Samuel Winship, then 12, had stolen $112 from a purse. The proceeding was called juvenile delinquency, not a crime, yet he was placed in a training school for 18 months and could be held for up to six years. The Court held that proof beyond a reasonable doubt was required. Exact words: “civil labels and good intentions do not themselves obviate the need for criminal due process safeguards in juvenile courts”.

16. 8.

    Luz reads Cards J and K. Which statement fits both?

    • Rights of the accused apply to any penalty the government seeks: Cases 1 and 2 and Winship alike
    • Rights of the accused apply when a penalty is more than twenty dollars: the three alike, as each exceeds it
    • Rights of the accused apply to proceedings the law calls criminal: neither case nor Winship's, which was not
    • Rights of the accused apply when liberty can be taken, whatever the label: Case 2 and Winship, not Case 1

17. Use this

    Card C. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963, 9 to 0). Gideon was a state case from Florida. Exact words from Justice Black's opinion: “in our adversary system of criminal justice, any person haled into court, who is too poor to hire a lawyer, cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him.” The Court overruled Betts v. Brady. Card E. Stack v. Boyle (1951). Exact words from Chief Justice Vinson's opinion: “Bail set at a figure higher than an amount reasonably calculated to fulfill this purpose is 'excessive' under the Eighth Amendment.” The “purpose” in the opinion is assurance that the accused will stand trial and submit to sentence if found guilty. Card K. In re Winship (1970). A New York family court judge found, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Samuel Winship, then 12, had stolen $112 from a purse. The proceeding was called juvenile delinquency, not a crime, yet he was placed in a training school for 18 months and could be held for up to six years. The Court held that proof beyond a reasonable doubt was required. Exact words: “civil labels and good intentions do not themselves obviate the need for criminal due process safeguards in juvenile courts”.

18. 9.

    Gideon, Stack and Winship each read a clause. What do the three share in how the Court read it, Noah?

    • Each asked what the clause protects (fair trial, appearance, liberty), not just a label
    • Each applied to federal courts, since the Bill of Rights limits the national government
    • Each overruled an earlier decision, so each marks a change in the Court's view
    • Each fixed an exact number, such as a dollar figure or a count of days, for when the right applies

19. Use this

    Card B. Betts v. Brady (1942), as Justice Black quoted it in 1963 (the Court is explaining its earlier decision): “appointment of counsel is not a fundamental right, essential to a fair trial.” Betts left state courts to appoint a lawyer for a poor defendant only in some cases, for example a charge of a capital offense. Card C. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963, 9 to 0). Gideon was a state case from Florida. Exact words from Justice Black's opinion: “in our adversary system of criminal justice, any person haled into court, who is too poor to hire a lawyer, cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him.” The Court overruled Betts v. Brady. Card D. Constitution, Fourteenth Amendment (1868), Section 1, part. Exact words (National Archives transcript): “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”.

20. 10.

    “The Court changed the Constitution in Gideon,” says Zee. Using Cards B, C and D, what is the strongest reply?

    • Wrong, since the Court does not change its view and Card C repeats what Betts already held
    • Right, since the Fourteenth Amendment was passed after the Sixth and so replaced its meaning
    • Right, since overruling Betts rewrote what the Sixth Amendment says about poor defendants
    • The Court changed how it read due process; Card D's words were the same in 1942 and 1963