In the 1901 case Minder v. Georgia, William Minder was convicted of murder in a Georgia court and sentenced to death. The U.S Supreme Court reviewed his appeal on the grounds that he had been denied due process because he was not provided with counsel during his trial, as required by the Sixth Amendment. However, at this time, states were not yet required to provide legal representation for defendants who could not afford it themselves; this requirement would only be established later in Gideon v. Wainwright (1963). Therefore, the Supreme Court upheld Minder's conviction and sentence despite acknowledging that if such a constitutional right existed at federal level then it should also apply at state level too.

The dissenting opinion in the Minder v. Georgia case argued that the state of Georgia had violated Minder's constitutional rights by denying him a fair trial. The justice believed that the jury was prejudiced against Minder due to his race, which influenced their guilty verdict. He also criticized the court for allowing evidence obtained through an illegal search and seizure, arguing it infringed on Minder's Fourth Amendment rights. Furthermore, he disagreed with how Georgia handled its post-conviction proceedings, stating they were not conducted properly or fairly according to federal law standards. This justice felt strongly that these issues combined resulted in a miscarriage of justice and therefore dissented from the majority ruling upholding Minder’s conviction.