In the case of Durley v. Mayo, Custodian, Florida State Prison (1955), the petitioner, Durley was convicted for rape in a state court and sentenced to death. He appealed his conviction on grounds that he had been denied due process as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment because he was not provided with counsel during his preliminary hearing before a committing magistrate. The Supreme Court dismissed this claim stating that it lacked merit since under Florida law at that time, no critical stage of prosecution occurred until after indictment or information - which is when counsel would be appointed if needed. Therefore, failure to provide counsel at an earlier stage did not violate constitutional rights according to existing precedents.

In the dissenting opinion for Durley v. Mayo, it was argued that the petitioner should have been granted a hearing to present evidence on his claim of racial discrimination in jury selection during his trial. The dissenting justices believed that there were serious allegations of constitutional violations which warranted further investigation and review by the court. They pointed out that if these claims were true, then they represented a gross violation of equal protection under law as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. Therefore, they disagreed with the majority's decision to deny Durley's petition without giving him an opportunity to substantiate his claims through a proper hearing process.