A) Marbury v. Madison INCORRECT Marbury v. Madison (1803) is a landmark case that established the principle of judicial review, giving the Supreme Court the power to declare laws unconstitutional. It did not address the right to counsel or the issue of indigent defendants. This case is foundational for the separation of powers and the checks and balances system, but it has no bearing on the precedent set in Betts v. Brady.
B) Gideon v. Wainwright CORRECT Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) is the correct answer because it directly overruled Betts v. Brady. The Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment's right to counsel is a fundamental right applied to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment, ensuring that indigent defendants in state courts are provided with legal representation. This decision was a major step in protecting the rights of the accused and ensuring fair trials.
C) Dred Scott v. Sandford INCORRECT Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) was a highly controversial case that ruled African Americans were not U.S. citizens and that Congress could not prohibit slavery in federal territories. It is a dark chapter in Supreme Court history and has no connection to the right to counsel or the precedent in Betts v. Brady. This case was later effectively nullified by the Civil War amendments.
D) Brown v. Board of Education INCORRECT Brown v. Board of Education (1954) was a landmark case that declared racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional, overturning the 'separate but equal' doctrine established in Plessy v. Ferguson. While it is a crucial civil rights case, it does not relate to the right to counsel or the issue of indigent defendants. It focused on equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment in the context of education.
