The Oyez Project Virtual Tour of the Supreme Court Building

Abstract

Oral Argument: Thursday, February 12, 1948
Decision: Monday, April 19, 1948

Advocates

Not available

Facts of the Case

Bute was charged with taking indecent liberties with children. He did not have an attorney and the trial court did not appoint one for him. Bute pleaded guilty and was sentenced to twenty years in prison.

Question

Does the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment require an attorney for Bute's defense?

Conclusion

No, an attorney is not required. Due process does not require states to provide counsel or to determine whether the defendant wants counsel. State courts are not bound by the procedures that federal courts are bound to follow. State court procedures are permissible unless they violate "the very essence of a scheme of ordered liberty." This case was reversed by Gideon v. Wainwright (1963).

Supreme Court Justice Opinions and Votes (by Seniority)

Sort by Ideology
(More information here)
Decision: 5 - 4
Voted with the majority, joined Burton's opinion
Vinson
Voted with the minority, joined Douglas' dissent
Black
Voted with the majority, joined Burton's opinion
Reed
Voted with the majority, joined Burton's opinion
Frankfurter
Voted with the minority, authored a dissent
Douglas
Voted with the minority, joined Douglas' dissent
Murphy
Voted with the majority, joined Burton's opinion
Jackson
Voted with the minority, joined Douglas' dissent
Rutledge
Voted with the majority, authored an opinion
Burton

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, Bute v. Illinois, 333 U.S. 640 (1948),
available at: <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1949/1947/1947_398/>
(last visited ).