Washington State Office of Public Defense

Transcription

1 Washington State Office of Public Defense

2 Public Defense in Washington State

3

4

5 Right to Counsel Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) 1989 RCW requires counties and cities to adopt standards for the delivery of public defense services Media coverage identifies concerns with public defense in Washington

6

7 Right to Counsel Best v. Grant County State v. A.N.J Wilbur v. Mt. Vernon U.S. Department of Justice Statement of Interest 2013 US District Court Judge Lasnik s decision in Wilbur v. Mt. Vernon

8 Washington State Supreme Court Standards for Indigent Defense

9 New Language Added to Court rules (CrR 3.1, CrRLJ 3.1, and JuCR 9.1): (4) Before appointing a lawyer for an indigent person the court shall require the lawyer to certify to the court that he or she complies with the applicable Standards for Indigent Defense Services to be approved by the Supreme Court.

10 The Washington Supreme Court adopts the following Standards to address certain basic elements of public defense practice related to effective assistance of counsel

11 WA Public Defenders Must Now Certify: Sufficient time to ensure effective representation. Contracts specify case types, and maximum number of cases. Contracts include sufficient funding for administrative costs. Office, address and phone. No more than 150 felonies/year. Or No more than 250 juvenile offender cases/year.

12

13 The caseload of a full-time public defense should not exceed the following: 150 Felonies cases /attorney / year; or 250 Juvenile Offender cases /attorney / year; or 80 open Dependency(Abuse & Neglect) cases /attorney; or 250 Civil Commitment cases /attorney / year; or 1 Active Death Penalty trial court case at a time 36 Appeals per attorney per year. OR

14 400 Misdemeanor cases / attorney / year, or 300 Misdemeanor cases / year in jurisdictions that have adopted a numerical case weighting system as described in the Standards

15 Misdemeanor Caseloads Should Not Exceed: 400 cases per year; or 300 total case-weights per year in a jurisdiction that has adopted a numerical case-weighting system.

16 A case is not always a case

17 The Greatest Resistance Has Come From: Local Jurisdictions Increased Costs for Additional Attorneys Changes to How Cases are Litigated Contract Public Defense Attorneys (Misdemeanor) Years of Low Pay Has Lead to Stacking of Contracts

18 1. Postpone misdemeanor caseload limits: January 1, OPD to create a model case-weighting policy based on: Time study Local factors affecting time required to represent defendants

19 Case-Weighting System Optional Written policies and procedures adopted and published and filed with State OPD. Recognizes the greater or lesser workload required compared to an average case. Does not institutionalize practices that provide insufficient time for quality representation.

20 CASE WEIGHTING STUDY

21 Without any ability to mandate compliance or participation, nor any monetary inducements, how to get attorneys to participate?

22

23

24 Cell Phone App

25

26 Cell Phone App Free CLEs Initial Instruction Sessions Pizza Outreach Lunches Personal Pleas $500

27 Collection of data on all cases opened between July 15 and November 27, Only three buckets for data client communication, case preparation, court time. Could not have been easier

28

29 Recorded by attorneys daily, weekly, occasionally Recorded electronically or manually Collected and stored online at Defender Data server Frequent monitoring of data by OPD staff

30 Local Factors Impacting Time Required for Indigent Defense Webinars Washington State Office of Public Defense

31 Webinar Overview Right to Counsel WA Supreme Court Standards for Indigent Defense Case-Weighting Your Input on Local Factors Impacting Time Required for Public Defense

32 Local Factors Webinars Defenders - Three Programs Court Administrators One Program Judges Two Programs

33 Examples of Factors that May Impact Time Required for Public Defense: Travel Time, Wait Time, Security Screening Charging Practices and Diversion Programs Specialty and Therapeutic Courts Technology Populations Served Attorney Experience Additional Suggestions?

34 Travel Time, Wait Time and Security Screening? Examples: Court Jail Crime Scenes Witnesses / Others

35 Travel Time, Wait Time and Security Screening?

36 Travel Time, Wait Time and Security Screening? Waiting for transport of inmates Waiting at the jail reception Waiting in court no matter how many cases one has on the calendar I look at this issue from the other directions. In the small towns and cities, we only have court as little as once a month, which requires much less travel time; and allows you to be in your office the far majority of the time. One of the courts I practice in has a dedicated public defender calendar, so there's no waiting for private counsel. Absence of access to SCOMIS and printers, copiers at court for use by public defenders creates efficiency issues. Going to court once a month with seven or eight cases is much more efficient than going to court every day, or nearly every day, and waiting for a case or two to get called.

37 Charging Practices and Diversion? Examples: In qualifying circumstances, automatic reduction to infractions Diversion programs

38 Specialty and Therapeutic Courts? Drug Court Mental Health Court DUI and DV Court Veterans Court

39 Technology? Examples: E-Filing E-Discovery Case Management Systems

40 Populations Served? Examples: Immigrant Military Student Homeless Disabled

41 Examples: Attorney Experience? More Complex Cases Assigned to Experienced Attorneys Experienced Attorneys Supervising Newer Attorneys

42 Attorney Experience?

43 Attorney Experience? We have no control over the amount of time we spend in court. The nature of the cases and sentencing consequences, (DUI and DV) have become so much complicated, we have to prep our cases just like we would a felony. With experience, more issues are spotted. The struggle is having sufficient time to do motions and trial preparation with the persistent long court calendars. Client communication depends more on the cognitive and attitudinal issues of the client than on our experience. With experienced attorneys and we cut down on time spent issues, like by merely showing case law rather than drafting suppression memos. I think experienced attorneys issue spot well, and that saves time. They know how to prepare dockets so dockets move faster or more efficiently. Experienced attorneys in my office end up with the most challenging clients. It's better practice to have younger lawyers defending misdemeanors because they fight like hell over a 10 day sentence - it's great! Experience makes attorneys more efficient in many senses. I would argue that there is no other factor which allows attorneys to handle more cases.

44 Your Suggestions for Additional Factors that May Impact Time Needed for Representation? Please Submit Additional Comments and Suggestions to WA State Office of Public Defense

45 THE MATH It s just arithmetic / statistics / algorithms?

46 The Delphi Method: awaiting the oracle Northwest style

47 Texas Indigent Defense Commission website Washington State Office of Public Defense website

48 Questions or Concerns? WA State Office of Public Defense PO Box Olympia, WA ext. 108 Katrin Johnson or ext. 114 Kathy Kuriyama