At the start of the trial, he stated that he was not prepared for trial because he had not yet assembled a counsel for his defense. He requested that the court provide him with counsel. The laws in the state of Florida at the time allowed defense to be provided to the defendant only in capital offenses. Gideon's case was not a capital case. The Judge refused his request on these grounds. .
This decision by the court was based on a prior case, Betts v Brady. In this case, an unemployed farm worker, Smith Betts was arrested and charged with robbery. Like Gideon, Betts requested court appointed counsel. The court refused stating that it was not in the interest of the county to provide counsel to non-capital cases. Betts was forced to defend himself, and lost the case. Betts appealed to the Supreme Court and they affirmed the trial courts decision. The court in which Gideon was tried relied on this decision when deciding whether or not to provide counsel to Gideon.
The trial continued with Gideon representing himself throughout. His efforts to defend himself did not succeed as he was a man with no legal training or education. He was convicted by the jury of felony charges and given the maximum sentence of five years. While in prison, Gideon was determined to have his conviction invalidated on the basis that the courts" refusal to provide him counsel, denied him of his rights. He filed a petition for habeus corpus in the Florida Supreme court. The court denied his petition for habeus corpus. .
After being denied by the Florida Supreme Court, Gideon appealed his case to the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court decided to here his case. In January of 1963 Gideon, along with an attorney provided by the government, went before the Supreme Court. He argued that it was unconstitutional for a state to create their own legislation which decided the circumstances under which a defendant will be appointed counsel.
