How were the Miranda v Arizona and Gideon v. Wainwright cases similar apex

The Miranda v Arizona and Gideon v. Wainwright cases were similar in the sense that the both cases resulted in "expanded protections" for people "accused of crimes".

Explanation:

In both the cases of the Miranda v Arizona and Gideon v. Wainwright the statement was made admissible only when the individual understands their rights. So the "Supreme Court" ruled the defendant's statements as inadmissible until they were informed about their right to have their own attorney during the questioning process in both the cases.

Miranda v Arizona have individual rights aka the right to remain silent and so did the other case