BETTS v. BRADY

Print this Page
Case Basics
Docket No. 
837
Petitioner 
Betts
Respondent 
Brady
Advocates
(argued the cause for the petitioner)
(argued the cause for the petitioner)
(Attorney General of Maryland, argued the cause for the respondent)
(argued the cause for the respondent)
Tags
Term:
Facts of the Case 

Betts was indicted for robbery in Maryland. An indigent, he was unable to afford counsel and requested one be appointed for him. The judge in the case denied the request, and Betts subsequently pled not guilty while maintaining he had a right to counsel and arguing his own defense.

Question 

Does denying a request for counsel for an indigent defendant violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment which embraces the defendant's right to counsel guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment?

Conclusion 

No. The Court ruled that the previously discovered right to counsel provided by the fourteenth amendment does not compel states to provide counsel to any defendant. Justice Owen Roberts' opinion asserted that the right to counsel merely prevented the state from interfering in a defendant’s request for representation rather than requiring a state to offer counsel.

Cite this Page
BETTS v. BRADY. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 17 October 2014. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1949/1941/1941_837>.
BETTS v. BRADY, The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1949/1941/1941_837 (last visited October 17, 2014).
"BETTS v. BRADY," The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, accessed October 17, 2014, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1949/1941/1941_837.