Betts v. Brady
E57400
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.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Betts v. Brady canonical | 3 |
| opinion in Betts v. Brady (dissent) | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T461309 — 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: Betts v. Brady Context triple: [Gideon v. Wainwright, overruledCase, Betts v. Brady]
-
A.
Briggs v. Elliott
Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
-
B.
Printz v. United States
Printz v. United States is a 1997 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited federal power by holding that Congress cannot compel state or local officials to implement federal regulatory programs.
-
C.
Bolling v. Sharpe
Bolling v. Sharpe is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racial segregation in Washington, D.C. public schools unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
-
D.
Escobedo v. Illinois
Escobedo v. Illinois is a landmark 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that expanded the Sixth Amendment right to counsel during police interrogations and helped lay the groundwork for the later Miranda warnings.
-
E.
Abrams v. United States
Abrams v. United States was a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the conviction of antiwar activists under federal law and is best known for Justice Holmes’s famous dissent articulating the “marketplace of ideas” concept in free speech jurisprudence.
- 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: Betts v. Brady Target entity description: 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.
-
A.
Briggs v. Elliott
Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
-
B.
Printz v. United States
Printz v. United States is a 1997 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited federal power by holding that Congress cannot compel state or local officials to implement federal regulatory programs.
-
C.
Bolling v. Sharpe
Bolling v. Sharpe is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racial segregation in Washington, D.C. public schools unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
-
D.
Escobedo v. Illinois
Escobedo v. Illinois is a landmark 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that expanded the Sixth Amendment right to counsel during police interrogations and helped lay the groundwork for the later Miranda warnings.
-
E.
Abrams v. United States
Abrams v. United States was a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the conviction of antiwar activists under federal law and is best known for Justice Holmes’s famous dissent articulating the “marketplace of ideas” concept in free speech jurisprudence.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (45)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
criminal procedure case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
criminal law ⓘ criminal procedure ⓘ |
| citation | 316 U.S. 455 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Fourteenth Amendment
ⓘ
surface form:
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
U.S. Constitution, Sixth Amendment ⓘ
surface form:
Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution
|
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1942-06-01 ⓘ |
| defendantType | indigent defendant ⓘ |
| dissentingJustices |
Frank Murphy
ⓘ
Hugo L. Black ⓘ William O. Douglas ⓘ |
| dissentingOpinionBy | Hugo L. Black ⓘ |
| doctrine | special circumstances rule for appointment of counsel ⓘ |
| fullName | Betts v. Brady self-link ⓘ |
| holding |
Appointment of counsel in state criminal cases is required only under special circumstances
ⓘ
Indigent defendants in state felony cases are not automatically entitled to court-appointed counsel ⓘ |
| impact | Limited the right to appointed counsel in state courts until 1963 ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| languageOfProceedings | English ⓘ |
| laterCharacterization | inconsistent with fundamental fairness under the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
Due Process Clause
ⓘ
surface form:
Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause
U.S. Constitution, Sixth Amendment ⓘ
surface form:
Sixth Amendment
right to counsel ⓘ |
| majorityJustices |
Felix Frankfurter
ⓘ
Justice Harlan F. Stone ⓘ
surface form:
Harlan F. Stone
Secretary of State James F. Byrnes ⓘ
surface form:
James F. Byrnes
Justice Owen J. Roberts ⓘ
surface form:
Owen J. Roberts
Robert H. Jackson ⓘ Stanley Forman Reed ⓘ
surface form:
Stanley F. Reed
|
| majorityOpinionBy |
Justice Owen J. Roberts
ⓘ
surface form:
Owen J. Roberts
|
| overruledBy | Gideon v. Wainwright ⓘ |
| overruledInYear | 1963 ⓘ |
| pageInUnitedStatesReports | 455 ⓘ |
| precedentStatus | overruled precedent ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Gideon v. Wainwright
ⓘ
Johnson v. Zerbst ⓘ Powell v. Alabama ⓘ |
| shortDescription | 1942 U.S. Supreme Court decision restricting automatic right to counsel for indigent defendants in state criminal cases ⓘ |
| stateParty | Maryland ⓘ |
| volumeInUnitedStatesReports | 316 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1942 ⓘ |
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: Betts v. Brady Description of subject: 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.
Referenced by (4)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
this entity surface form:
opinion in Betts v. Brady (dissent)