Powell v. Alabama
E142858
Fourteenth Amendment case
Sixth Amendment case
U.S. Supreme Court case
criminal procedure case
landmark decision
Powell v. Alabama is a landmark 1932 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held in capital cases the Due Process Clause requires defendants be given access to effective legal counsel, especially when they are young, illiterate, or otherwise disadvantaged.
All labels observed (5)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Powell v. Alabama canonical | 3 |
| The Scottsboro Boys | 2 |
| Powell et al. v. Alabama | 1 |
| Scottsboro Boys trials | 1 |
| U.S. Supreme Court cases Powell v. Alabama | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T1228177 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Powell v. Alabama Context triple: [George Sutherland, notableWork, Powell v. Alabama]
-
A.
Craig v. Boren
Craig v. Boren is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that established intermediate scrutiny as the standard for evaluating gender-based classifications under the Equal Protection Clause.
-
B.
Gideon v. Wainwright
Gideon v. Wainwright is a landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court decision that guaranteed the right to court-appointed counsel for criminal defendants who cannot afford an attorney.
-
C.
Katzenbach v. McClung
Katzenbach v. McClung is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal government’s power to prohibit racial discrimination in local restaurants under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
-
D.
Betts v. Brady
Betts v. Brady was a 1942 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held indigent defendants in state criminal cases were not automatically entitled to court-appointed counsel, a rule later overturned by Gideon v. Wainwright.
-
E.
Chisholm v. Georgia
Chisholm v. Georgia was a 1793 U.S. Supreme Court case that held a state could be sued in federal court by a citizen of another state, a ruling that led directly to the adoption of the Eleventh Amendment limiting such suits.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Powell v. Alabama Target entity description: Powell v. Alabama is a landmark 1932 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held in capital cases the Due Process Clause requires defendants be given access to effective legal counsel, especially when they are young, illiterate, or otherwise disadvantaged.
-
A.
Craig v. Boren
Craig v. Boren is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that established intermediate scrutiny as the standard for evaluating gender-based classifications under the Equal Protection Clause.
-
B.
Gideon v. Wainwright
Gideon v. Wainwright is a landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court decision that guaranteed the right to court-appointed counsel for criminal defendants who cannot afford an attorney.
-
C.
Katzenbach v. McClung
Katzenbach v. McClung is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal government’s power to prohibit racial discrimination in local restaurants under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
-
D.
Betts v. Brady
Betts v. Brady was a 1942 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held indigent defendants in state criminal cases were not automatically entitled to court-appointed counsel, a rule later overturned by Gideon v. Wainwright.
-
E.
Chisholm v. Georgia
Chisholm v. Georgia was a 1793 U.S. Supreme Court case that held a state could be sued in federal court by a citizen of another state, a ruling that led directly to the adoption of the Eleventh Amendment limiting such suits.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (51)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
Fourteenth Amendment case
ⓘ
Sixth Amendment case ⓘ U.S. Supreme Court case ⓘ criminal procedure case ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ |
| alsoKnownAs |
Scottsboro Boys trials of the 1930s
ⓘ
surface form:
Scottsboro Boys case (first Supreme Court decision)
|
| appliesTo | capital cases ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
criminal law ⓘ criminal procedure ⓘ |
| citation |
287 U.S. 45
ⓘ
53 S. Ct. 55 ⓘ 77 L. Ed. 158 ⓘ |
| citedAs | first major Supreme Court case on the right to counsel ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvision |
Due Process Clause
ⓘ
surface form:
Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause
Sixth Amendment right to counsel ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| decisionDate | 1932-11-07 ⓘ |
| dissentingJustices |
Justice James C. McReynolds
ⓘ
surface form:
James C. McReynolds
Pierce Butler ⓘ Willis Van Devanter ⓘ |
| dissentType | dissenting opinion ⓘ |
| establishedPrinciple |
Courts must appoint counsel for indigent defendants in capital cases in time to allow for adequate preparation
ⓘ
Right to counsel is a fundamental right in capital cases ⓘ |
| focusesOn |
disadvantaged defendants
ⓘ
illiterate defendants ⓘ young defendants ⓘ |
| fullCaseName |
Powell v. Alabama
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Powell et al. v. Alabama
|
| hasJurisdiction | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| holding |
Failure to provide reasonable time and opportunity to secure counsel violates due process
ⓘ
In capital cases, defendants must be afforded counsel as a requirement of due process ⓘ Indigent defendants in capital cases must be given access to effective legal counsel ⓘ |
| impact |
expanded federal constitutional protections for criminal defendants in state courts
ⓘ
incorporated aspects of the right to counsel against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
due process
ⓘ
fair trial ⓘ right to counsel ⓘ |
| majorityJustices |
Charles Evans Hughes
ⓘ
George Sutherland ⓘ Justice Harlan F. Stone ⓘ
surface form:
Harlan F. Stone
Justice Louis D. Brandeis ⓘ
surface form:
Louis Brandeis
Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. ⓘ Owen Josephus Roberts ⓘ
surface form:
Owen J. Roberts
|
| majorityOpinionBy | George Sutherland ⓘ |
| originatedIn |
Alabama
ⓘ
surface form:
State of Alabama
|
| overturnedLowerCourt | Alabama state court convictions of the Scottsboro Boys ⓘ |
| precedentFor |
Betts v. Brady
ⓘ
Gideon v. Wainwright ⓘ Hamilton v. Alabama ⓘ |
| relatedTo |
Scottsboro Boys trials of the 1930s
ⓘ
surface form:
Scottsboro Boys
|
| yearDecided | 1932 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Powell v. Alabama Description of subject: Powell v. Alabama is a landmark 1932 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held in capital cases the Due Process Clause requires defendants be given access to effective legal counsel, especially when they are young, illiterate, or otherwise disadvantaged.
Referenced by (8)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
this entity surface form:
The Scottsboro Boys
this entity surface form:
The Scottsboro Boys
subject surface form:
Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution
this entity surface form:
Scottsboro Boys trials
this entity surface form:
U.S. Supreme Court cases Powell v. Alabama
this entity surface form:
Powell et al. v. Alabama