Johnson v. Zerbst
E287372
Johnson v. Zerbst is a 1938 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held federal courts must provide counsel to indigent defendants in serious criminal cases unless there is a competent and intelligent waiver.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Johnson v. Zerbst canonical | 2 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T2682356 — 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: Johnson v. Zerbst Context triple: [Betts v. Brady, relatedCase, Johnson v. Zerbst]
-
A.
Reynolds v. United States
Reynolds v. United States is an 1879 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the distinction between protected religious belief and regulable religiously motivated conduct, holding that the Free Exercise Clause does not excuse individuals from compliance with otherwise valid criminal laws such as those banning polygamy.
-
B.
Mapp v. Ohio
Mapp v. Ohio is a landmark 1961 U.S. Supreme Court case that applied the exclusionary rule to the states, holding that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used in state criminal prosecutions.
-
C.
Gitlow v. New York
Gitlow v. New York is a 1925 U.S. Supreme Court case that marked a major step in applying First Amendment free speech protections to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
D.
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.
-
E.
Brandenburg v. Ohio
Brandenburg v. Ohio is a 1969 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly strengthened free speech protections by establishing the "imminent lawless action" test for when advocacy of violence can be punished under the First Amendment.
- 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: Johnson v. Zerbst Target entity description: Johnson v. Zerbst is a 1938 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held federal courts must provide counsel to indigent defendants in serious criminal cases unless there is a competent and intelligent waiver.
-
A.
Reynolds v. United States
Reynolds v. United States is an 1879 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the distinction between protected religious belief and regulable religiously motivated conduct, holding that the Free Exercise Clause does not excuse individuals from compliance with otherwise valid criminal laws such as those banning polygamy.
-
B.
Mapp v. Ohio
Mapp v. Ohio is a landmark 1961 U.S. Supreme Court case that applied the exclusionary rule to the states, holding that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used in state criminal prosecutions.
-
C.
Gitlow v. New York
Gitlow v. New York is a 1925 U.S. Supreme Court case that marked a major step in applying First Amendment free speech protections to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
D.
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.
-
E.
Brandenburg v. Ohio
Brandenburg v. Ohio is a 1969 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly strengthened free speech protections by establishing the "imminent lawless action" test for when advocacy of violence can be punished under the First Amendment.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (38)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
landmark decision ⓘ |
| appliesTo | federal criminal prosecutions ⓘ |
| appliesToCases | serious criminal cases in federal court ⓘ |
| appliesToDefendants | indigent defendants ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
criminal procedure ⓘ |
| bindingOn | lower federal courts ⓘ |
| category |
United States Supreme Court cases on the Sixth Amendment
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court criminal procedure case law ⓘ |
| citation | 304 U.S. 458 ⓘ |
| clarified | that courts must indulge every reasonable presumption against waiver of fundamental constitutional rights. ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvision |
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 | 1938-05-23 ⓘ |
| decisionType | reported decision ⓘ |
| fullCaseName | Johnson v. Zerbst self-link ⓘ |
| holding |
A waiver of the right to counsel cannot be presumed from a silent record.
ⓘ
Federal courts must provide counsel to indigent defendants in serious criminal cases unless there is a competent and intelligent waiver of that right. ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | federal ⓘ |
| languageOfProceedings | English ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
U.S. Constitution, Sixth Amendment
ⓘ
surface form:
Sixth Amendment
right to counsel ⓘ waiver of counsel ⓘ |
| majorityOpinion | held that the Sixth Amendment requires appointment of counsel for indigent defendants in federal courts in serious criminal cases. ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Hugo L. Black ⓘ |
| page | 458 ⓘ |
| party |
Johnson
ⓘ
Zerbst ⓘ |
| precedentFor |
Gideon v. Wainwright
ⓘ
right to counsel jurisprudence ⓘ |
| recognizedRight | right to appointed counsel in federal felony prosecutions ⓘ |
| requires | affirmative showing on the record of a valid waiver of counsel ⓘ |
| standardEstablished | competent and intelligent waiver of counsel ⓘ |
| typeOfRightRecognized | fundamental right ⓘ |
| volume | 304 U.S. ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1938 ⓘ |
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: Johnson v. Zerbst Description of subject: Johnson v. Zerbst is a 1938 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held federal courts must provide counsel to indigent defendants in serious criminal cases unless there is a competent and intelligent waiver.
Referenced by (2)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.