Which option best completes the diagram? box 1 : ? box 2 : the supreme court rules that state must provide lawyers for poor defendants in felony cases. box 3 : states establish public defenders' offices to represent defendants who can't afford lawyers. a. clarence gideon is sued for refusing to provide state citizens with lawyers b. clarence gideon fights to pass the sixth amendment c. clarence gideon is convicted of a felony in florida after being refused a lawyer d. clarence gideon is chosen as a supreme court justice answer : clarence gideon is convicted of a felony in florida after being refused a lawyer : apex

C. Clearence Gideon was convicted of a felony in Florida after being refused a lawyer.

- Clarence Gideon, who was a poor indigent and, therefore, could not afford a lawyer, was accused of robbery. The problem came when he requested the court, during his trial in Florida in 1961, to provide a lawyer for him, but the court refused to do it, since it only provided lawyers for defendants accused of more serious crimes such as murder. As a consequence, Gideon was sent to jail.

- It is important to mention that, in 1961, the Sixth Amendment’s right to legal counsel did not applied to the states: it only did so to the federal government.

- When in prison, Gideon found out and was convinced that the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause (which are laws of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments that limit the power of the government to deny people “life, liberty, or property” without fully respecting their legal rights and the correct legal procedure) incorporated the Sixth Amendment's right to counsel to the states. Finally, when Gideon tells the U.S. Supreme Court about this conviction, his case was taken in 1963 and a renowned lawyer was appointed by the Court to defend him.  

- In sum, the case Gideon vs. Wainwright was of crucial importance because it guaranteed the right to an attorney for poor or indigent people.

a) which ethnic groups live in this community?

i just took test

the answer is the petition of right.

explanation:

offer to of right, real demand of attesting a benefit against the english crown, the most remarkable point of reference being the petition of right of 1628, which parliament sent to charles i fussing of a movement of oversteps of law. the term also implied the framework (invalidated in 1947) by which a subject could sue the crown.   taking a gander at the frameworks used by maria amidu to make a standard in 2015 commending the 1628 petition of right, which was sent to charles i by the english parliament. at uniquely based law the crown, or the sovereign in his official cutoff, couldn't be sued in the ruler's courts. since the ruler was, really, the superior ace of those courts, coordinating value in them between his subjects, he was not subject to their ward. therefore it transformed into a preparation, at whatever point a subject's certified or individual property had come into the responsibility for ruler or his specialists without legitimate perfect, for the subject to engage the master in chamber for its recovery.