Jul
06

No Lawyer, No Crime? A Troubling Case In Oregon

Some of the best lawyers I know are public defenders. Period. What's more, I envy public defenders. Imagine the practice of law without the grimy necessity of having to ask clients for money? But there is no paradise, life keeps reminding me. Times are tough now from coast to coast. Even public defenders seem to be crying uncle.


Last week, the Southern Oregon Public Defenders Office refused to represent a man accused of murdering a two-year-old child. Why? The lawyers in the office did not have time to devote to the case. In other words, although the office could easily have agreed to represent the man, the lawyers would not have been able to give his case the care it deserves. So rather than offer merely the facade of justice, the office decided it could not take the case.


This is terrifying. No one imposes budgetary restraints on the state when it comes time to prosecute. The police make an arrest, the state sets its sites on a person's life or liberty, and the game is on. We say that a defendant has a right not just to counsel, but to effective assistance of counsel. But what happens when we refuse to fund one side of the aisle?
Benjamin James George appeared in from of a Jackson County, Oregon judge last week and learned that the public defender's office could not represent him. The office is too busy. It has too many case. It has a full load of murder cases and cannot handle another. 


I'm not sure what to make of this. The public defender's office says that its lawyers can only handle one murder case at a time. When all of the folks in the office are assigned a file, there isn't room for more.


That sounds laudable, and, perhaps, it is laudable. No one should settle for second-class justice. But lawyers rarely work on one complex case at a time. [EDITED WITH SPECIAL THANKS TO TRAVIS.] Assuming this isn't grandstanding on behalf of the public defender's office, it raises the troubling specter of a criminal justice system unable to cope.


Mr. George's arraignment was postponed until July 14th. Another public defender's office will be consulted to see whether it can provide counsel. But suppose, for argument's sake, that office is also too busy for another murder case. What then?


The real danger is that showboat counsel will arrive; some lawyer, perhaps fresh out of law school, or hungry for a headline, will grab the case at a discount rate and do little or nothing to prepare the defense of Mr. George. This practice is far more common than folks realize. In a lean economy there are lawyers on the verge of bankruptcy. Some will reason that even nonpaying work of a certain type is better than no work at all. Why not a murder? After all, isn't murder the crown jewel of a criminal defense lawyer's caseload?


The market for legal services is unregulated. Those without means get public defenders, or so we hope, Oregon teaches. The wealthy hire the best that money can buy. Folks in the middle class are often caught without either a public defender or counsel. They scrape by with whatever counsel they can afford. The sad reality is that many Americans charged with crimes settle for second-rate justice because the alternative is no justice at all.


I'm watching the George case in Oregon to see how the system responds. Suppose no public defender's office will step forward because all are stretched to the breaking point? What then? Does the state drop the case in the interest of justice? Of course not. 


But suppose there is no money to hire defense counsel. What then? Oregon is blazing a trail few of us want to travel but all of us need to recognize.

Comments (3)
Posted on July 7, 2010 at 8:48 pm by Marcus L. Schantz
That just doesn't pass the sniff test. What about ...
That just doesn't pass the sniff test. What about someone from the local bar stepping up on a pro bono basis. Or why can't the judge appoint a private attorney? Shocking.

Posted on July 7, 2010 at 12:03 am by Anonymous
I actually had experience with a public defender's...
I actually had experience with a public defender's office in southern oregon (though it was a county level office). I initially had representation through one of their more experienced attorneys... who had been an attorney for a total of 4 years, and had taken less then 10 cases to trial (he told me this himself). He was not qualified to handle my case, both because of the type of crime, and because of some specific circumstances surrounding the crime (I was 17 when initially brought in and questioned, but 18 when officially charged). I did plea, on his recommendation, but preserved the age issue for appeal... the appealate court sent it back for a retrial because of the age issue, and because the PD office was so overworked, the court assigned (not sure how it worked) a local attorney who had over 20 years experience in that county... and my case was over, and all charges were dismissed, within a month.

My point here is that most county or state level public defenders are overworked (and underpaid)... but if they simply refused to represent any more cases, the courts would be forced to either dismiss the cases, or else find some way to assign an attorney... which isn't always a bad thing.

Posted on July 6, 2010 at 8:41 am by Travis
"I'm not sure what to make of this. ...its lawyers...
"I'm not sure what to make of this. ...its lawyers can only handle one murder case at a time.
But lawyers rarely work on one case at a time."


I suspect what is meant is one murder case at a time in addition to each public defenders other cases.

A quote from the NY Times (albeit about Florida) "Over the last three years, the average number of felony cases handled by each (Public Defender) in a year has climbed to close to 500, from 367, officials said, and caseloads for lawyers assigned to misdemeanor cases have risen to 2,225, from 1,380."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/09/us/09defender.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print
For Display:
What is the day of the week?
Confidential:
(Won't be displayed with comment)

Link must be approved, then will show on this page.

x

About Norm Pattis

Norm Pattis is a Connecticut based trial lawyer focused on high stakes criminal cases and civil right violations. He is a veteran of more than 100 jury trials, many resulting in acquittals for people charged with serious crimes, multi-million dollar civil rights and discrimination verdicts, and scores of cases favorably settled.

Personal Website

www.normpattis.com
www.normpattis.com

Law Firm Website

www.pattislawfirm.com
www.pattislawfirm.com

I believe that the state is a necessary fiction and that failing to combat it is the first step toward tyranny.
– Norm Pattis

Disclaimer:

Nothing in this blog should be considered legal advice about your case. You need a lawyer who understands the context of your life and situation. What are offered here are merely suggested lines of inquiry you may explore with your lawyer.

Pattis Video