u.s. Department of Justice 11 ': ., ) 1", ,~,', >.II', r ,..,t:.~ Bureau of Justice Statistics , '" .:-t; .. ¥,11! · il. i.i. -:.J " Bureau of Justice Statistics reports Corrections Privacy and security (revised October 1986) BJS bulletins and special reports: Computer crime: Call toll-free 800-732-3277 (local State and Federal prisoners. 1925-85. BJS special I "ports: 251-5500) to order BJS reports, to be added NCJ-102494.10/86 Electronic fund transfer frraud. NCJ-96666. 3/85 to one of the BJS mailing lists, or to speak i'risoners in 1985. NCJ-101384. 6/86 Electronic fund transfer and crime. to a reference specialist in statistics at the Prison admission and releases. 1983. NCJ-92650. 2/84 Justice Statistics Clearinghouse, r;dlional NCJ-100582.3/86 Electronic fund transfer fraud. NCJ-l00461. Capital punishment 1984. NCJ-98399. 8/85 Criminal Justice Reference Service. 4/86 Examining recidivism. NCJ-96501. 2/85 Computer security techniques. Box 6000. Rockville. MD 20850. Single Returning to prison. NCJ-95700. 11/84 copies of reports are free: use NCJ number NCJ-840tl9.9/82 Time served in prison. NCJ-93924. 6/84 Electronic fund transfer systems and crime. to order. Postage and handling are charged Historical corrections statistics in the U.S •• 1850- NCJ-83736. 9/82 for bulk orders of single reports. For single 1984. NCJ-102529. 10/86 Expert witness manual, NCJ-77927. 9/81 copies of multiple titles. up to 1U titles are Prisoners in State and Federal Institutions on Criminal justice resource manual, NCJ-61550. free; 11-40 titles 510; more than 40. $20; Dec. 31. 1983. NCJ-99861. 6/86 12n9 libraries call for special rates. Capital punishment 1984 (final), NCJ-99562. 5/86 Privacy and security of criminal history Public-use tapes of BJS data sets and Capital punishment 1983 (final), NCJ-99561. 4/86 information: other criminal justice data are available 1979 surveyofinmates of Statecorrec/ional faci/Jties Compendium of State le9islation, 1984 from the Criminal Justice Archive and and 1979 census of State correctional facilities: overview. NCJ-98077. 9/85 Information Network. PO Box 1248. Ann BJS specIal reports: Criminal justice Information policy: Arbor. M' 48106 (313-763-5010). The prevalence of imprisonment. NCJ-93657, Crime control and criminal records (BJS speCial 7/85 report). NCJ-99176. 10/85 National Crime Survey Career patterns in crime, NCJ-88672, 6/83 State criminal records repositories (BJS CrimiRal victimization in the U.S.: BJS bulletins. technical report). NCJ·99017. 10/85 1984 (final report), NCJ-l00435, 5/86 Prisoners and drugs. NCJ-87575, 3/83 Data quality of criminal history records. NCJ- 1983 (final report). NCJ-96459, 10/85 Prisoners and alcohol. NCJ-86223. 1/83 98079. 10/85 1982 (final report). NCJ-92820. 11/84 Prisons and prisoners. NCJ-80697, 2/82 Intelligence and investigative records. 1973-82 trends. NCJ-90541. 9/83 Veterans in prison. NCJ-79232. 11/81 NCJ-95787. 4/85 1980 (final report), NCJ-84015. 4/83 Victlmlwitness le9islation: An overview, 1979 (final report) NCJ-76710. 12/81 Census of Jails and survey of JaIl inmates. NCJ-94365. 12/84 Jail inmates. 1984. NCJ-101094, 5/86 Information poilcy and crime control strategies BJS special reports: Jail inmates. 1983 IBJS bulletin). NCJ-99175. (SEARCH/BJS conference). NCJ-93926. Preventing domestic violence against women. 11/85 10/84 NCJ-l02037,8/86 The 1983 jail census (BJS bulletin!. NCJ-95536. Research access to criminal justice data. Crime prevention measures. NCJ-100438. 3/86 11/84 NCJ-84154, 2/83 The use of weapons in committing crimes. Census of jails. 1978: Data for mdlvldua1lalls. Privacy and juvenile justice records. NCJ-99643, 1/86 vols !-IV. Northeast. North Central. South. West. NCJ-84152.1/83 Reporting crimes to the police. NCJ-99432. NCJ-722 79-72282 12/81 Survey of State laws (BJS bullelln), 12/85 Profile of jail inmates. 1978. NCJ-65412, 2/81 NCJ-80836, 6/82 Locating city. suburban. and rural crime. NCJ- Privacy and the private employer. 99535. 12/85 Children in custody: NCJ-79651,11/81 The risk of violent crime. NCJ-97119. 5/85 Public juvenile facilities. 1985 (bulletin) The economic cost of crime to victims. NCJ- NCJ-l02457. 10/86 General 93450 4/84 1982-83 census of juvenile detention anti Family violence. NCJ·93449. 4/84 BJS bulletinS: correctional facilities. NCJ-101686. 9/86 Police employment and expenditure. BJS bulletins: NCJ-l00117.2/86 Households touched by crime. 1985. Expenditure and employment Tracking offenders: The child victim. NCJ- NCJ-l01685.6/86 BJS Bulletins 95785. 12/84 Criminal victimization. 1 984. NCJ-98904. 10/85 Justice e~penditure and employment: The severity 01 crime. NCJ-92326, 1/84 The crime of rape. NCJ-96777. 3/85 1983. NCJ-101776, 7/86 The American response to crime: An overview Household burglary. NCJ-96021, 1/85 1982. NCJ-98327 8/85 of criminal justice systems. NCJ-91936. 12/83 Criminal Victimization. 1983. NCJ-93869. 6/84 Justice expenditure and employmentin the U.S.: Tracking offenders. NCJ-91572, 11/83 Violent crime by strangers. NCJ-80829. 4/82 Victim and witness assistance: New State Crime and the elder(y. NCJ-79614. 1/82 1980 and 1981 extracts. NCJ-96007. 6185 1971-79. NCJ-92596. 11184 laws and the system's response. NCJ-87934, Measuring crime. NCJ-75710. 2/81 5183 Response to screening questions in the National Courts 1986 directory of automated criminal justice Crime Survey (BJS technical report). NCJ- information systems. NCJ-102260. 10/86 97624.7185 BJS bulletinS: The growth of appeals: 1973-83 trends. Sourcebook of criminal justice statistics. 1985. Victimization and fear of crime: World NCJ-100899.10/86 . perspectives. NCJ-93872. 1185 NCJ-96381. 2/85 Case filings in State courts 1983. NCJ-95111 Crime and justice facts. 1985. NCJ-l00757. 5/86 The National Crime Survey: Working papers. Bureau of Justice Statistics annual report. fiscal vol. I Current and histOrical perspectives, 10/84 BJS special reports: 1985. NCJ-100182. 4/86 NCJ-75374, 8/82 National survey of crime severity. NCJ-96017. vol II. Methologlcal studies, NCJ-90307. 12/84 Felony case-processing time. NCJ-l 01985. 8/86 Felony sentencing in 18 local 10/85 Issues in the measurement of crime. Criminal Victimization of District of Columbia NCJ-74682, 10/81 jurisdictions. NCJ-97681, 6/85 The prevalence of guilty pleas. NCJ-96018. residents and Capitol Hill employees. 1982-83. The cost of negligence: Losses from preventable NCJ-97982:Summary. NCJ-98567; 9/85 household burglaries. NCJ-53527. 12n9 12/84 Sentencing practices in 13 States. NCJ-95399. The DC crime victimization study implementation. Rape Victimization in 26 American cities. NCJ-98595. 9/85. 5760 domestic/$9,20 Canadi­ NCJ-55878.8n9 10/84 Criminal defense systems: A national an/$12.80 foreign Criminal victimization in urban schools. The DC household victimization survey data base: NCJ-56396. 8n9 survey. NCJ-94630. 8/84 Habeas corpus. NCJ-92948, 3/84 Documentation. NCJ-98596. $6401$840/$11 An introduction to the National Crime Survey. User manual. NCJ-98597. $8.20/59.801$12 80 NCJ-43732. 4n8 State court caseload statistics. 1977 and 1981. NCJ-87587. 2183 BJS telephone contacts '85. NCJ-98292. 8/85 Local victim surveys: A review of the Issues. How to gain access to BJS data (brochure). National criminal defense systems study. NCJ- NCJ-39973, 8n7 BC-000022. 9/84 94702. 10186 Proceedings of the 2nd workshop on law and Parole and probation The prosecution of felony arrests: justice statistics. 1984. NCJ-93310. 8/84 BJS bulletins: 1981. NCJ-l01380. 9/86 Report to the nation on crime and Justice: Probation and parole 1984. NCJ-100181, 1980. NCJ-97684. 10/85 The data. NCJ-87068, 10/83 2/86 1979. NCJ-86482, 5/84 Dictionary of criminal justice data terminology: Setting prison terms. NCJ-76218. 8/83 State court model statistical dictionary. 2nd ed. NCJ-76939. 2/82 Parole in the U.S., 1980 and 1981, NCJ-87387. Supplement. NCJ-98326. 9/85 Technical standards for machine-readable data 3/86 1 sl edition. NCJ-62320. 9180 supplied to BJS, NCJ-75318. 6/81 Characteristics of persons entering parole State court organization 1980. NCJ-76711. 7/82 during 1978 and 1979, NCJ-87243. 5/83 A cross-city comparison of felony case Characteristics of the parole population. 1978. processln9. NCJ-55171. 7n9 NCJ-66479.4/81 Parole in the U.S .• 1979, NCJ-69562.3/81 Federal offenses and offenders BJS special reports: Pretrial release and misconduct. NCJ-96132. 1/85 BJS bulletins: Bank robbery. NCJ-94463. 8/84 See oider form Federal drug law violators. NCJ-92692. 2/84 Federal justice statistics. NCJ-80814. 3/82 on last page u.s. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics

National Criminal Defense Systems Study

Final Report

By Robert L. Spangenberg Beverly Lee Michael Battaglia Patricia Smith A. David Davis

Abt Associates Inc. Cambridge, MA

September 1986 NCJ-94702

94702 U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exaclly as received from the person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated In this document are those of the authors and do not necessarity represent the offici at position or policie5 of the Nationat tnstitute of Justice.

Permission to reproduce this ~d material has been granted by Public Dornain/Bureau of Justice Statistics/U. S. Department of Justice to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS).

Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system reqUires permis­ sion of the ~bt owner. U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics Steven R. Schlesinger Director

Joseph M. Bessette Deputy Director Benjamin H. Renshaw Deputy Director

Report of work perforl.led by Abt Associates Inc.

This report was supported by grant number 82-BJ-CX-K002, awarded to Abt Associates Inc., Cambridge, Mass., by the Bureau of Justice Statistics under the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended. The grant was monitored by Carla K. Gaskins, program manager, BJS adjudication unit. Report production was administered by Marilyn Marbrook, publications unit chief, assisted by Millie Baldea and Joyce M. Stanford.

Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

BJS authorizes any person to reproduce, publish, translate, or otherwise use all or any part of the copyrighted material in this publication, with the exception of those items indicating that they are copyrighted or reprinted by permission of any source other than Abt Associates Inc.

ii National Criminal Defonse Systems Study ------

Contents

, eee . fNfi gap? "'"' " I. Introduction, 1 Characteristics of contract Appointment of separate systems, 19 counsel in felony cases Origin and purpose of the Agency responsible for involving multiple National Criminal Defense awarding contracts for defendants, 35 Systems Study, 1 indigent defense The legal mandate for services, 20 Legal training for indigent defense Types of groups attorneys providing services, 1 awarded contracts to indigent defense, 36 Previous survey research provide indigent efforts, 1 representation, 20 Changes in methods of The need for nationwide Average numbet' of cases providing indigent criminal defense data, 2 awarded to contract representation, 36 Research goals, 3 attorneys, 20 Extent of reported Types of contracts change, 36 Organization of the report, 4 awarded,20 Methodology, 4 Contract monitoring, 21 Several State-level changes Sampling plan, 4 occurred in the delivery of Survey development, 4 indigent defense services Respondent m. Indigent defense expenditures from 1980-83, 36 identification, 5 and caseload, 22 Numerous changes took Fielding the survey and Expenditures for indigent place among programs followup,6 defense, 22 providing indigent defense Data compilation and Indigent defense services at the county level analysis, 7 expenditures in 1982, 23 from 1980-83, 37

Limitations of the data, 8 Per capita costs, 24 Appendixes Per capita costs in largest counties, 24 Technical appendix, 39 II. Types and characteristics of Regional per capita indigent defense systems, 9 costs, 26 A. Questionnaires, 41 County questionnaire, 41 Organization and types of Adequacy of indigent Program questionnaire, 42 defense systems, !l defense funding, 27 B. Modified instrument for States' organizing telephone interviews, 48 systems, 9 Indigent defense caseload C. State profiles, 53 Regional variations in and cost per case, 27 Alabama, 53 systems for providing Indigent defense caseload Alaska, 54 indigent defense, 11 in 1982,29 Arizona, 55 Variations by county size Arkansas, 57 in systems for providing Incidence of indigent California, 58 indigent defense, 12 cases, 30 Colorado, 60 Percent of population Analysis of indigent Connecticut, 61 served by each type rates by case type, 32 Delaware, 63 of indigent defense District of Columbia, 64 system, 13 Statewide technical Florida, 65 assistance, training and Georgia, 67 Characteristics of public other services, 33 Idaho, 69 defender systems, 14 IIlinois, 71 Public defender program Indiana, 72 affiliation, 15 IV. Variations in case processing Iowa, 73 Public defender program and system changes, 34 Kansas, 74 staffing, 15 Kentucky, 76 Support staff, 16 Formal criteria for indigency Louisiana, 77 determination, 34 Maine, 79 Characteristics of assigned Maryland, 80 counsel systems, 16 Recoupment, 34 Massachusetts, 82 Compiling assigned Michigan, 83 counsel lists, 17 Early representation, 35 Minnesota, 85 Distribution of caseload Mississippi, 86 among assigned Missouri, 87 counsel, 18 Montana, 88 Assigned counsel fees, 18 Nebraska, 89 Nevada, 90

National Criminal Defense Systems Study iii New Hampshire, 93 14. Summary of public Technical appendix New Jersey, 93 defender system New Mexico, 95 characteristics, 15 36. Selection of Maryland New York, 96 15. Summary characteristics counties with probability North Carolina, 97 of assigned counsel proportionate to size, 40 North Dakota, 99 systems, 17 Ohio, 100 16. Distribution of cases Figures Oklahoma, 102 among assigned counsel Oregon, 103 by region, 18 n. Types and characteristics of P'~nnsylvania, 104 17. Summary of features of indigent defense systems Rhode Island, 106 assigned counsel South Carolina, 107 compensation, 19 1. Percent of counties Vel'dUS South Dakota, 108 18. Summary of contract percent of population Tennessee, 110 system features, 20 served by indigent Texas, 111 defense systems, 14 Utah, 112 m. Indigent defense expenditures 2. Number of full-time Vermont, 113 and caseload lawyers employed Virginia, 114 by public defenders Washington, 115 19. States' indigent defense by region, 16 West Virginia, 117 funding sources, 23 Wisconsin, 118 20. Total expenditures for m. Indigent defense expenditures Wyoming, 119 indigent defense by source and caseload for the 50 States, 25 21. Regional expenditures and 3. Total expenditures for Tables per capita costs, 26 indigent defense, 1982, 23 22. Ranking of per capita 4. Regional per capita L Introduction indigent and Justice expenditures for indigent spending, 28 defense, 27 1. Summary of information 23. Total 1982 caseload for 5. Expenditures and per capita requirements, 3 States and average cost costs of indigent defense: 2. Sample size, 5 per case, 29 50 largest counties vs. the 3. Primary program sample 24. Summary of average cost Nation, 27 and completed per case for indigent 6. Per capita indigent questionnaires, 8 defense, 29 defense costs: 50 largest 25. Regional caseload and cost counties by region, 27 II. Types and characteristics of per case, 30 indigent defeDBe systems 26. Indigent cases per 1,000 Technical appendix population for States, :n 4. Level of organization of 27. Indigent cases per 1,000 7. Maryland counties indigent defense services: population by census numbered for purposes Sta te-by-Sta re, 9 region, 31 of sampling, 39 5. Level of organization of 28. A comparison of States' indigent defense services rankings in factors related by region, 10 to indigent cases, 32 6. Type of defense system by 29. Comparison of generally State, 10 accepted indigency rates 7. Summary of total number and survey data, 32 of counties using each type of indigent IV. Variations in ·~ase processing defense system, 11 and system chlmges 8. Type of defense system by census region, 11 30. Incidence of recoupment 9. Regional analysis of payments, 35 type(s) of defense 31. Speed of case system(s) used, 12 assignment, 35 10. Type of indigent defense 32. Early representation by system by size of county type of system, 35 population, 13 33. Circumstances under which 11. Type of defense system for separate counsel are the largest 50 counties in appointed to the United States, 14 codefendants, 35 12. Percent of counties vs. 34. Appointment of separate percent of population counsel for codefendants served by each type by region, 36 of indigent defense 35. Availability of legal system by region, 15 training for indigent 13. Variation among States defense attorneys by with predominant public program type, 36 defender systems, 15

iv National Cn"minal Deflnse Systelns Study Chapter I Introduction

fdi@ • . II ; m22' I¢

Origin and purpose of the National Alabama 287 U.S. 45 (1932). In the mandating counsel where the U.S. Criminal Defense Systems Study Powell case, the sixth amendment Supreme Court has not yet acted or right to counsel was made applicable has not required counsel under the The quality of justice in the United to the States through the due pro­ sixth amendment. Examples include States depends on the effective and cess clause of the 14th amendment, requiring that counsel be provided in efficient functioning of the entire though it was at that time still mental commitment cases, probation criminal justice system. The com­ limited to capital cases. Gideon revocation hearings, status offenses, ponents of the system-law enforce­ v. Wainwright 372 U.S. 335 (1963) prison disciplinary proceedings, and ment, the courts, prosecution, was the landmark decision extending certain other noncriminal matters. corrections, and defense-are inter­ the right to counsel to all felony related, and their smooth functioning cases in State court proceedings. In These changes have radically altered is interdependent. Many believe the Argersinger v. Hamlin 407 U.S. 25 the nature and scope of defense defense function is the most over­ (1972) the Court further extended services. The ability of practitioners looked and underfunded of all the the right to counsel to misdemeanor and policy makers to respond to these components of the criminal justice cases in which the defendant may changes has been constrained by lack system. Nevertheless, the defense receive a sentence of imprisonment. of information, in part, and by of accused criminals is constitu­ limited funding. Without basic data tionally mandated and thus must be The Court also has determined in a describing defense operations it has regarded as an essential aspect of long series of decisions that the right been difficult, if not impossible, to criminal justice. Furthermore, the to counsel is not limited to the crim­ assess compliance with the above adversarial nature of the legal inal trial process. This right has legal mandates, to plan responsibly system requires a strong and inde­ been expanded to include critical for changes in programs, or to meas­ pendent defense bar without regard stages prior to trial, such as arraign­ ure the impact of change on the to the defendant's ability to pay for ment, preliminary hearing, and the criminal justice system as a whole. legal services. These services must entry of a plea. After conviction, be provided and are being provided, the right to counsel has been de­ Previous survey research efforts in one way or another, in every clared 1:0 extend to sentencing and jurisdiction in the United States. appeal. In the past 10 years several attempts have been made to remedy this lack Unfortunately, how these services Juveniles also were accorded the of information. A review of past are being provided, by whom, and at right to counsel by the Court in In re research and survey efforts, how­ what expense have remained largely Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967), when it held ever, reveals that the national sur­ unclear over the last two decades that 14th amendment due-process vey da ta collected was limited for because of the large number of protections must be extended to all one or more of the following reasons: programs and the diversity of their juveniles threatened with delin·· I) Data reported predate major court approaches to providing indigent quency proceedings. Other decisions decisions and recent trends defense. This study provided have resulted in providing juveniles o The survey response rate was low, national-level data on such basic with many of the rights accorded to especially from assigned counsel and information as system types, funding adults accused of similar conduct. rural areas sources, costs, and case loads. Such o The sample was small, nonrepre­ information is of use not only to While the Gideon, Argersinger, and sentative, or otherwise inappropriate indigent defense practitioners in Gault cases provide the broad con­ for national estimates of indigent fulfilling their responsibilities, but stitutional mandate for counsel in defense services also to policy makers and planners criminal cases, they obviously do not o The scope of the survey was who must initiate and adapt to totally define the overall scope and limited change in all components of the requirements of the sixth amend­ e The results yielded no trend data criminal justice system. ment. These challenges have been because the different studies used left to the States, and, in some different data bases. TJ,1e legal mandate for indigent measure, the State interpretation of defense services constitutional decisions affects local The only previous attempt at con­ programs and expenditures. For ducting a comprehensive nationwide Perhaps the most significant factor example, either by statute or State survey was made in 1972-73 by the affecting the development of quality supreme court decision, some States National Legal Aid and Defender defense services has been the ex­ require counsel in all misdemeanor Association (NLADA). The survey panding scope of the legal mandate cases, while others require counsel findings were puplished in The Other for indigent defense in the last 20 only if there is a reasonable like­ Face of Justice, which attempted years. The right of indigent criminal lihood that a jail sentence may be to study such areas as defendants to representation by imposed. The relative cost impli­ (I Rate of indigency and methods of counsel in Federal courts was firmly cations for providing indigent repre­ determining indigency embedded in the sixth amendment of sentation in each of these two types the United States Constitution and of State requirements are obvious. was first extended to proceedings in 1L• Benner and B. Lynch-Neary, The Other Face of Justice: A Report of the National the State courts by the decision of Furthermore, some States have gone Defender Survey (Washington, D.C.: National the U.S. Supreme Court in Powell v. considerably further than others in Legal Aid and Defender Association, 1973).

National Criminal Defonse Systems Study 1 Introduction

= Igt :rrrm:r &'" IQA o Relationship between bail and mailed to the chief defender and officials, and others. These assump­ indigency staff attorneys in every public de­ tions include the following: o Scope of representation and the fender agency in the United States. impact of the Argersinger case Although the survey did reveal some It There appears to be a trend toward CD Methods of providing counsel interesting facts about the process State centralization and State o Availability of support services of plea bargaining, it was not in­ funding G Time of first client contact and tended to gather comprehensive data o Public defender programs are caseload, dispositions, and regarding indigent defense as a beginning to replace assigned counsel expenditures for indigent defense. whole. programs o Creation of contract defense pro­ Questionnaires were mailed to all "The Defender Office S;.Jrvey," Which grams with membel's of the private 3,110 counties in the country, and an was conducted in 1978, sought to bar are beginning to occur through­ additional 20 field surveys were collect data on the geographical out the country conducted in 20 randomly chosen jurisdiction, scope of representation, o With a few exceptions, indigent districts. The survey respondents in procedure for appointment of cases, defense programs are severely each county included use of expert witnesses and con­ underfunded and overwhelmed with o Felony and misdemeanor judges sultant paMls, and program needs of cases o Appellate and supreme court public defense systems. A 13-page CI With a few exceptions, members of judges instrument was mailed to every the private bar appointed in criminal (I Chief prosecutor public defender office listed in the ('ases are substantially underpaid Q All defender agencies NLADA Directory. The information CI Early entry of defense counsel into o County or court clerk obtained proved to be useful in the criminal case process exists in ., County auditor expanding knowledge about indigent only a small number of jurisdictions o President of the county bar defense types and systems but, o Support services, such as investi­ assoc ia tion again, was not intended to produce gative resources, expert witnesses, o Random sample of private national estimates. social services, and other necessary attorneys in counties with assigned expenses, are generally not available counsel programs. Other surveys were designed to for private appointed counsel. gather information on limited areas While this was an ambitious effort, of interest, such as NLADA's In recent years, this type of impres­ the survey was limited. First, the "Defender Management Information sionistic information has formed the rate of response to the survey was Systems Surveys I and II" (1979 and foundation for many significant only 25% overall, casting serious 1980) and the National Center for polky decisions made on all levels of doubt on the validity of generaliza­ State Courts' (NCSC) "Assigned State and local government. Some tions of the data. (The fact that the Counsel Fee Study" (1979). In of the information may have been survey instrument was lengthy and addition, a few surveys have been wrong; some of the decisions may complicated may have accounted, in conducted that collected some minor have been mistakes. Without further part, for the poor response rate.) defense data along with information research into program characteris­ Second, the survey was conducted about various other components of tics and system trends, it has been just after the Argersinger decision the criminal justice system. Exam­ impossible to assess the correctness was handed down by the Supreme ples are the Bureau of the Census' of either these assumptions or the Court, too soon for it to have been Expenditure and Employment Series policies which they supported. able to reflect the bulk of system (annual since 1967) and the NCSC's changes in response to that deci­ Court Directory Update (1979-80). In an attempt to address these sion. Despite these problems the Again, these data were not intended information needs in the field, the study was significant in highlighting to provide a comprehensive, nation­ Federal Government has provided for the first time the complexities wide picture of indigent defense some funds for indigent defense and problems presented by a decen­ programs. research during the past decade. tralized indigent defense system. Efforts by the Law Enforcement 2 The need for nationwide criminal Assistance Administration (LEAA), Several other surveys were conduct­ defense data the National Institute of Justice ed by NLADA in the 1970's. "The (NIJ), and the Bureau of Justice Indigent Defense Systems Analysis" The information made available as a Statistics (BJS) have contributed (unpublished) attempted to gather result of these surveys and other substantially to our knowledge of data on case entry (specifically the research efforts in the last 10 years indigent defense. In addition, availability of early representation suggests a general outline of the several private groups have demon- and support services) and plea bar­ scope and nature of defense services gaining. Questionnaires were mailed nationwide. Based on this informa­ to 300 defender agencies around the tion certain assumptions began to be 2LEAA-funded projects included the National made by funding sources, indigent College for Criminal Defense, the Consortium Nation, and field visits, including of Appellate Defender Offices, the Consortium court docket studies, were conducted defense program practitioners, court of Regional or Multi-County Defense Programs, in eight jurisdictions. Surveys were Criminal Defense T('clmical Assistance Project, and statewide projects funded through discre­ tionary gran ts.

2 National Criminal Defense Systems Study en uu:uzJ' #¥ strated a commitment to providing assistance to beleaguered defense Table 1. Summary oC information reqiidrements attorneys, including most recently Audience Information requirements the ABA's Indigent Defense Informa­ tion Program, sponsored and admini­ Legislators and State policymakers Need comparative cost, caseload, and organ- stered by the Standing Committee on (especially in States considering major izational information from comparable States. changes in the structure, funding, or Need to be updated on statu tory and con- Legal Aid and Indigent Defendants organization of defense services) stitutional requirements for representation. (SLAID). The program (1) increases understanding among leaders of the Administrators of statewide criminal Need current information on structural issues defense programs (such as staffing ratios, location of offices, and State and local bar associations relationship to judiciary) and procedural issues about problems in funding for, and (such as caseflow management, training, quality of, indigent defense services supervision, statewide resource sharing, and and (2) offers support for bar associ­ setting of standards). ation leaders seeking to improve Administrators of local criminal Need current cost, caseload, and system type indigent defense services. These defense programs information to enable cross-jurisdictional efforts to provide information and comparision and long-range management plan- technical assistance to indigent ning in resolving defense resource allocation defense attorneys have made impor­ problems. tant contributions to improving S ta te and county bar associations Need current information on fee schedules for appointed counsel, methods for certifying eligi- information on and providing actual ble private practitioners, and legal responsibility services in indigent defense across oC the priva te bar to accept indigent caseloads. the Nation. National program planners (examples: Need information on current national, State, and Bureau of Justice Statistics, National county defense expenditures. Need to assess In spite of the advances made, too Institute of Justice, etc.) current gaps in services and determine how little basic information is available Federal money can best be allocated-technical even to develop a rudimentary assistance, action grants, need areas. analysis of nationwide trends in Researc,h community (examples: Need broad, reliable nationwide database that defense representation. Further­ Bureau of Justice Statistics, National will facilitate future defense and criminal- more, the problems facing indigent Institute of Justice, State Statistical justice-rela ted research. defense attorneys-public defenders, Analysis Centers) assigned counsel, and contract at­ torneys alike-remain and even may Legal Aid and Defender Association o To facilitate future research. be worsening. The expansion of (NLADA) to conduct the National Tasks included (1) establishing a legally required services, increasing Criminal Defense Systems Study. broad, reliable data base useful to caseloads, and limited, sometimes shrinking funds represent severe The goal of the survey effort was to criminal justice researchers and (2) provide data that could begin to developing a blueprint for a regular constraints on the ability of defense attorneys to provide adequate repre­ answer fundamental questions national census of defender regarding the nature and scope of organizations that will ultimately sentation to their indigent clients. Without information on the opera­ indigent defense service delivery. provide trend data for all counties in More specifically there were three the United States. tions of the multitude of indigent defense programs and on recent basic objectives: The following section summarizes trends in costs and caseloads, it will o To rovide reliable descri tive the survey methodology that was be difficult, if not impossible, to data. Tasks included 1 collecting employed to collect and analyze the satisfy current program development and planning needs. Policy makers current data on the types of criminal data necessary to accomplish these and practitioners on all levels, from defense systems available in each of project objectives. The study local to Federal, need this basic the 50 States, (2) comparing the methodology was designed to provide information to make rational, well­ various systems in terms of cost and reliable, nationwide estimates of informed decisions about the future caseload, and (3) providing trend many facets of indigent criminal of indigent defense. Information data (where available) for the last 2 defense services. These data should requirements of several important to 3 years. be useful to practitioners and groups are summarized (table 1). o To assess the level of response to policy makers at all levels in program defense service gelivery require­ development and planning. Even Research goals ~. Tasks included (1) establish­ more important, these data will ing the apparent system response to serve as the baseline for further Recognizing the need for basic the Argersinger and Gault cases and research to J'efine the understanding information about indigent defense to more recent defense-related court of the role of indigent defense in the services and the lack of reliable decisions and (2) identifying system criminal justice system and to sources of such information, the response to such critical factors increase the knowledge of long-term Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) pertaining to defense services as trends in the provision of defense provided funds in November 1981 for early representation, availability of services. Abt Associates and the National support services and investigative Nsources, and horizontal/vertical representation.

National Cn'minal Defonse Systems Study 3 Introduction

hi IE ?;g If ¥i

Organization of this report programs around the country. To indigent criminal defense services balance these concerns several serving U.S. counties. A secondary The report contains three chapters different layers of data collection objective was to develop State in addition to the introductory were incorporated into the method­ estimates with usable precision. material. Chapter II, "Types and ology. This approach also balanced Characteristics of Indigent Defense the desire to have a relatively Stratification was used to ensure Systems," contains information on standardized data collection plan that the sample size of counties in the level of organization and struc­ with the need to be flexible and each State was large enough to pro­ ture of indigent defense services diligent in collecting data from the vide reliable statewide estimates. both nationally and on a State-by­ less accessible or more atypical Also, approximately the same num­ State basis. In particular, types programs. The major weaknesses of ber of counties (16 to 18) were of systems for counties have been previous survey efforts were low selected in each State to develop classified to provide estimates of response rates and no representative estimates at comparable levels of the frequency with which public samples-problems that the present precision. The number of counties defender, assigned counsel, and survey was specifically designed varied slightly from State to State to contract systems are used. Descrip­ to avoid. The survey project was account for the finite population tive information is presented on the divided into five phases: correction because samplinl was features of each system. Highlights o sampling plan done without replacement. All of differences by region or commu­ o survey development counties within a State were sampled nity size are discussed throughout. o respondent identification in 11 States (Alaska, Arizona, Con­ o survey fielding and followup necticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Indigent defense expenditures and o data compilation and analysis. Massachusetts, Nevada, New Hamp­ caseload are analyzed in Chapter III, shire, Rhode Island, and Vermont) again on both national and State-by­ Each of these phases of the research and the Distrist of Columbia, State levels. Total costs and is described briefly in the following because each has fewer than 20 amounts contributed by each source sections. A more detailed discussion counties. are discussed. Per capita analyses of the survey methodology is con­ are provided for each State and for tained in the technical appendix to Because much of the indigent de­ the four regions, as well as the cost this report. fense activity around a county takes per case and numbering of indigent place in counties of relatively cases per thousand population. Sampling plan greater population size, the inclu­ sion of these counties in the sample Finally, Chapter IV, "Variations To avoid the sampling problems was not left to chance. Rather, in Case Processing and System experienced in earlier survey these counties were included in the Changes" in Indigent Defense attempts a stratified sample was sample with certainty. The remain­ Services covers features of case developed based on county popula­ ing counties (not self-representing) processing common to all systems, tion sizJ as reported in the 1980 were sampled with probability pro­ including: indigency screening, census. Sampling with probability portional to size to obtain the recoupment, early representation, proportional to the size of the coun­ desired number of sample counties. and appointment of separate coun­ ty population had two advantages: The sample size in each State rela­ sel for codefendants. Changes in (1) Previous experience has shown tive to the total number of counties structure and funding of services that large population size is posi­ is listed in table 2. are summarized. tively correlated with the need for defense services. Thus, because the Survey development Appendix C containing State profiles sampling method increased the prob­ has State-by-State data on ability of larger counties being It was determined initially that there o court organization selected, the survey covered the would be three sets of question­ o legislation pertaining to indigent counties of greatest interest and naires: (1) one for each of the defense activity regarding indigent defense primary program respondents; (2) one o expenditures broken out by source services. for each of the sample counties pro­ o legislation and fee schedules for (2) All counties had a known, nonzero viding funds for indigent defense; assigned counsel. probability of being selected. and (3) one for the appropriate judge in the court of general trial juris- Recognizing that States and counties Methodology vary tremendously both in terms of system organization and the col­ 4The unbiased variarlce estimation of the In designing the National Criminal lecting and reporting of data, the sample mean,Y';" is: Defense Systems Study, an attempt sampling plan was designed to allow was made to assess realistically the N-n S2 for calculation of precise national Var(Y) = N -'n trade-off between the cost of col­ and regional estimates regarding lecting data (especially in regions in N-n which the data are not readily avail­ 3The county was selected as the unit of analysis where N is the finite population correction, able) and the need for comprehensive because many States organize and fund their N is the total number of counties in a State, information about indigent defense indigent defense systems on a county basis. n is t~e number of sample counties in a State, and S is the estimation of variance per unit.

4 National Cdminal DefellSe Systems Study i i :;* H i '§ #ilil # MOP ! t Ii' = diction in an effort to gather Table 2. Sample size transactional data on felony cases. Fielding of multiple questionnaires Number of was believed to be preferable to counties Number of sending a single lengthy instrument Number of selected counties counties Sample with selected to all types of respondents for two State in State reasons: first, it reduced the burden size certainty randomly on any single individual and second, Total 3,082 718 251 467 it capitalized on the respondents' Alabama 67 16 2 14 ability to answer questions with Alaska 4 4 4 0 which they were familiar. It was Arizona 14 14 14 0 also decided to field a single instru­ Arkansas 75 17 1 16 ment to public defenders, assigned California 58 16 5 11 counsel, and contract programs with Colorado 63 16 9 7 a "skip pattern" indicating which Connec ticu t 8 8 8 0 types of programs should answer Delaware 3 3 3 0 District of Columbia 1 1 1 0 which questions. Florida 67 16 7 9 Georgia 159 18 3 15 Following a lengthy instrument Hawaii 4 4 4 0 development process involving Idaho 44 14 5 9 extensive review by NLADA and Illinois 102 17 3 14 staff of the Bureau of Justice Indiana 92 17 3 14 Statistics (BJS), draft questionnaires Iowa 99 17 2 15 were submitted to the Office of Kansas 105 17 4 13 Management and Budget (OMB) for Kentucky 120 18 2 16 Louisiana 64 16 4 12 clearance. At the same time, the Maine 16 16 16 0 three types of questionnaires were mailed to selected respondents for Maryland 23 9 4 5 Massachusetts 14 14 14 0 pretest. A major finding of the Michigan 83 17 5 12 pretest was that respondents were Minnesota 87 17 5 12 almost always unable to supply Mississippi 82 17 2 15 accurate responses to the court Missouri 114 18 3 15 system questionnaire because of lack Montana 56 15 4 11 of systematically organized informa­ Nebraska 93 17 3 14 tion. As a result, it was decided not Nevada 17 17 17 0 to field the court system instru­ New Hampshire 10 10 10 0 ment. The pretest also suggested New Jersey 21 8 0 8 other changes in the program and New Mexico 32 12 3 9 county questionnaires that necessi­ New York 62 16 8 8 North Carolina 100 18 1 17 tated a second submission to OMB. North Dakota 53 15 4 11 Copies of the final forms of these Ohio 88 17 4 13 two questionnaires are included in Oklahoma 77 17 3 14 this report (Appendix A). Oregon 36 13 5 8 Pennsylvania 67 16 3 13 Respondent identification Rhode Island 5 5 5 0 South Carolina 46 15 4 11 Once the sampling plan was com­ South Dakota 66 16 3 13 pleted, project staff began to com­ Tennessee 95 17 4 13 pile a list of appropriate survey Texas 254 19 4 15 Utah 29 12 5 7 respondents for eac?; of the question­ naires to be fielded. For the Vermont 14 14 14 0 Virginia 104 17 1 16 present survey effort, a unique list Washington 39 14 6 8 of appropriate respondents for the West Virginia 55 15 1 14 two questionnaires had to be devel­ Wisconsin 72 16 3 13 oped. Depending on the type of Wyoming 23 10 3 7 system (public defender, assigned counsel, contract, or a combination thereof), the level of organization pal, county, and/or State) the list of o Chief justice (municipal, county, or State) and the respondents might include any num­ o Local judges source(s) of program funds (munici- ber of the following individuals: o County commissioner o State court administrator o State public defender I) Executive director of the State bar o Local public defenders 5See technical appendix for details on o State auditor construction of sampling plan. o Private assigned counsel o County auditor o Contract attorneys.

National Criminal Defense Systems Study 5 Introduction

'""" em Respondents for the program o Use of mailing lists supplied by the In many cases the State coordina tors questionnaire. Indige:,t defense National Center for State Courts to made local in-State calls to urge progl'ams were identified in each identify presiding judges in courts of program and county respondents to county. Initially, specific con­ general lfia1 jurisdiction around the complete the questionnaires. In tact names were obtained from the country. some cases, State coordinators filled following sources: out questionnaires by telephone, and, o Abt Associates' Criminal Defense Respondents for the county question­ occassionally, in-person interviews. Technlcal.Assistance Project naire. Because a number of States The success of this survey effort is (eDT AP) files. These files consisted fund their indigent defense system in due in no small part to the effort of of: (1) a computerized library whole or in part through county the 50 volunteer State coordinators. containing extensive information on funds, it was also necessary to the 42 States from which CDTAP develop a list of respondents for In several StateG, mostly those received requests for technical the county questionnaire in the containing statewide public defender aSsistance, as well as annual reports, sample counties where some county programs, county-level data were caseload studies, and caseload funds are provided. Fortunately, the aggregated at the State level by the recoras from all 50 States where development of the county respond­ statewide organization. At their available; (2) a current list of ent list was substantially aided by suggestion, all sample program approximately 100 indigent defense acquisition of a mailing list from the questionnaires were directed to their consultants around the country with National Association of Counties attention, filled out in detail, and whom CDTAP had collaborated; and (NACO) containing the names and returned to the research staff. (3) data from a 50-State telephone addresses of county executives, survey conducted in 1981 for the chairmen of county boards, financial Telephone followup. With the American Bar Association, which officers, treasurers, and other key substantial assistance of the State gathered basic information on officials in the sample counties. coordinators, an extremely high system type, cost, and case load and Based on these lists the most appro­ response rate was achieved for both developed numerous personal priate official in each county was the county and the primary program contacts natiollwide. chosen to receive the questionnaire. questionnaires. Nonetheless, there o NLADA files. The files consisted remained a small number of county of: (l) the "1981 Directory of Legal Fielding the survey and followup and program respondents who had Aid ,and Defender Officers," includ­ not returned a questionnaire. ing the names, addresses, and phone The initial mail survey. Survey Followup telephone interviews were numbers of the more than 2,000 pub­ packages werb mailed to 510 county conducted with these resp0!pdents to lic defense lawyers who are members respondents and 797 program improve the response rate. In some of NLADA and (2) contacts identi­ respondents as follows: cases where the respondent had not fied through the Defender Manage­ o 436 public defender programs received the survey questionnaire, an ment Information Systerr,,; (DMIS) o 206 ad hoc assigned counsel additional copy was sent. These study through which NLADA assisted programs followup techniques improved the several jurisdictions in upgrading o 29 coordinated assigned counsel response rate by encouraging co­ their Management Information programs operation, identifying additional Systems. o 47 contracts with individual respondents, and clarifying respond­ attorneys ents' questions that were quite The development of the program o 26 contracts with law firms distinct from their willingness to respondent list proved to be a far o 53 other or not determined. 7 participate in the survey effort. more difficult task than anyone During the course of the mail survey, could have predicted. The printed repeated calls were made and letters Telephone interviews also were con­ sources listed above were extremely were sent to the 50 State coordi­ ducted in some cases where surveys helpful in identifying the approxi­ nators. had been returned, but internal mately 400 public defender programs editing procedures revealed. in~on­ located in the 718 sample counties, 6 Among the more complex problems that were sistencies in responses or mlssmg but were of little help in identi­ encountered in this task was the identification cost and caseload information. In fying the more than 300 remaining of respondents in many assigned counsel these instances the respondent was assigned counsel and contract pro­ counties where separate lists of private bar contacted by telephone to clarify the grams. A variety of additional members are developed for various court levels inconsistency or to collect the methods were used to identify appro­ within the jurisdiction or by differenl. judges in the same court. Ultimately, the challenge was crucial data. priate respondents in these jurisdic­ to locate one individual judge or court clerk tions, including the following: who would undertake the task of aggregating 8The primary program questionnaire was, o Enlistment of a volunteer State the data across several courts or within the reduced in scope to facilitate the collectJ.on of coordinator in each of the 50 States same court. essential cost and case load data. A:ppen~lx B Q Numerous telephone calls and 7postage-paid business reply envelopes were contains the revised program questIOnnaire that correspondence directed to judges, included in each package to facilitate return of was administered over the telephone. State and local bar officials, court the questionnaire. In addition, respondents were provided with a toll-free telephone clerks, and others number so that they could contact project staff if they had questions or problems regarding the survey.

6 NatiofU11 Criminal Defense Systems Study OJ '4 A¥

Survey of conflict/unavailability funding levels and resource con­ tionnaires, including the District of programs. As the survey effort straints. As appointments have Columbia. Of these, 490 (or 99%) continued the staff began to note a increased, some public defenders were completed. Of the total rather dramatic development. Infor­ have been unable to keep up with the sample of 777 program question­ mation flowed in from a number of case load and have been looking for naires distributed, 750 (or 97%) were States, indicating that a major ways to deflect some of the cases. completed. A breakdown of this change was occurring in counties A few programs have been able to figure by State shows that a 100% with public defender programs. The negotiate a fixed case load level with response rate was achieved in 33 development centered around a their funding sources. Some have States (table 3). In another 12 States growing number of cases that were been relieved of assignment through there was only one incomplete pri­ no longer being handled by public informal agreements with local mary questionnaire. Of the 208 defenders, primarily because an judges, and others have been suc­ conflict/unavailability programs for increasingly strict definition of what cessful in limiting case load through which questionnaires were distrib­ constitutes a conflict of interest was litigation. This process is commonly uted, 147 or 71% were completed. being applied. referred to as a "declaration of un­ For 56 of the remaining 61 incom­ availability." Whatever the method plete questionnaires, expenditure While historically the code of pro­ employed, the result in public de­ data was obtained from reliable fessional responsibility has prohib­ fender jurisdictions is a substantial secondary sources. ited one attt:rney from representing increase in the volume of cases codefendants when a conflict of handled by the second program Data compilation and analysis interest has been determined, most (private bar) already charged with recently the U.S. Supreme Court and representing codefendants in conflict As questionnaires were received, a other appellate courts have been cases. thorough review and edit check was applying a more stric~ interpretation completed by project staff involving: of what a conflict is. Because Although both of these problems o Comparison of cost data reported all attorneys employed in a public began to surface 2 to 3 years ago, by respondents with program and defender's office are considered to preliminary examination of the county questionnaires to ensure that be members of the same firm, if a survey's program data revealed that the figures were reasonable and conflict exists between codefendants the volume of cases no longer consistent the office cannot represent both handled by public defenders has o Comparison of the proportion of defendants. Under these circum­ increased dramatically. Because this expenditures to population size both stances, the court must appoint a growth in the number of secondary within and outside the sample private member of the bar, thus es­ programs would obviously have a o Verification of data from available sentially creating a second indir8nt significant impact on questions of secondary sources and substitution of defense program in the county. caseload and cost, the identification such data in that fraction of cases of a new set of respondents was where there was a significant As court decisions have restricted approved-those programs that discrepancy the policy of codefendant repre­ handled conflict and/or unavail­ o Apportionment of mUlticounty sentation, many public defenders ability cases in public defender figures to county level on the basis have begun to make a conflict counties. It was determined that, in of census da tao declaration in a larger number of about 60% of the public defender Additional logic checks were per­ cases and some declare conflict as a program counties, there was in fact formed manually and by computer to matter of policy in every codefend­ a distinct and separate program. In assure data consistency prior to ant case. This practice can have the remaining 40% the cost of con­ analysis. serious cost implications, because flict and unavailability cases was it is estimated that there are co­ built directly into the public The basic approach of the analysis defendants in approximately 25% of defender't budget with the second was to provide descriptive program all adult felony cases. program being administered by the statistics at national and regional public defender program. Thus it levels and by population size of A second development has also added was decided to identify a program county. For certain key variables to the problem. Traditionally, in respondent for those 208 programs in descriptive statistics also were public defender counties individual the sample counties that were developed for the States. The judges have been empowered with providing conflict/unavailability descriptive statistics focused on the authority to appoint the public services separately from their public questions that applied to all pro­ defender in all cases except obvious defender programs. Ultimately, a grams, as well as on questions that conflicts. Such appointments often survey of all such conflict and applied only to public defender, are made without regard to overall unavailability programs was con­ assigned counsel, or contract pro­ ducted by telephone. Again, the grams. Caseload and expenditure abbreviated questionnaire was 9Holloway v. Arkansas, 435 U.S. 475 (1978). data were first generated for each administered to avoid burdening State. Estimates were then devel­ IOlf the primary program is not a public . respondents. oped for the Nation as a whole, the defender program the problem does not eXist, four census regions, and the 50 because the judge can simply appoint a Response rates. In all, responses different private attorney to represent the largest counties in the United second defendant. were sought for 494 county ques-

National Criminal Deftnse Systems Study 7 Introduction

ern

States. The technical appendix Table 3. Primary program sample and completed questionnaires provides additional detail on the analysis of procedures employed. Number of Percent of Number of Number of completed completed Limitations of the data counties programs question- question- State in sample in sample naires naires

The availability of data on indigent Total 718 777 750 97% criminal defense services varies Alabama 16 18 18 100 greatly among jurisdictions. At one Alaska 4 4 4 100 extreme are jurisdictions that Arizona 14 14 14 100 collect little caseload data and Arkansas 17 17 15 88 unreliable cost data; this is in California 16 16 16 100 contrast to the most sophisticated Colorado 16 16 16 100 jurisdictions, which have automated Connecticut 8 8 8 100 management information systems Delaware 3 3 3 100 that collect extensive, reliable District of Columbia 1 1 1 100 caseload, cost, and other manage­ Florida 16 16 16 100 ment-related data. Unfortunately, Georgia 18 19 18 95 the former case is the more prev­ Hawaii 4 4 4 100 Idaho 14 14 13 93 alent. In all too many jurisdictions, Illinois 17 18 18 100 the desired data are simply not Indiana 17 17 16 94 routinely collected and centralized. Iowa 17 17 16 94 The layered approach to data col­ Kansas 17 33 32 97 lection employed in this survey has Kentucky 18 18 18 100 resulted in collecting much informa­ Louisiana 16 16 15 94 tion from areas of the country and Maine 16 16 16 100 types of programs that are typically Maryland 9 9 9 100 difficult to access. However, the Massachusetts 14 28 26 93 Michigan 17 20 20 100 sometimes sketchy 01' "soft" nature Minnesota 17 17 14 82 of the only available data imposes Mississippi 17 18 18 100 some inherent restrictions on the Missouri 18 18 18 100 survey results. Montana 15 16 16 100 Nebraska 17 17 16 94 These limitations notwithstanding, Nevada 17 17 17 100 this survey methodology has over­ New Hampshire 10 10 10 100 come many of the flaws in past data New Jersey 8 8 8 100 collection efforts and, in so doing, New:Vlexico 12 12 12 100 provides up-to-date, comprehensive, New York 16 21 20 95 North Carolina 18 18 18 100 and reliable, nationwide data on in­ North Dakota 15 15 15 100 digent defense in the United States. The stratified sampling plan provides Ohio 17 27 27 100 Oklahoma 17 18 17 94 a representative sample of jurisdic­ Oregon 13 13 12 92 tions around the country. The list of Pennsylvania 16 16 16 100 respondents is by far the most com­ Rhode Island 5 5 5 100 plete ever developed for indigent South Carolina 15 16 15 94 defense programs. Furthermore, the South Dakota 16 16 14 88 two-stage data collection process Tennessee 17 17 14 82 incorporating both mail surveys and Texas 19 19 17 89 12 100 telephone follow-up provides for Utah 12 12 exceptionally high response rates, Vermont 14 14 14 100 including 99% completed county Virginia 17 17 17 100 Washington 14 17 15 88 questionnaires. The analysis of these West Virginia 15 15 15 100 data provides not only the most reli­ Wisconsin 16 16 16 100 able description of present program I Wyoming 10 10 10 100 operations and system trends avail­ I I able to date, but also a truly unique and sound foundation for future research.

8 National Criminal Defense Systems Study Chapter II Types and characteristics of indigent defense systems

, as .17 !i1 :;;:u;;; ,"h'"

vices. Service is provided by This chapter describes the overall Table 4. Level of organization of level of organization and structure salaried staff attorneys operating indigent defense services: State by State of indigent defense systems in the out of regional offices or through United states today. Key features private assigned counselor contract Level of organization are discussed of the tht'ee basic programs. District program types that provide indigent or State State County circuit defense services: public defenders, Defense systems organized on a assigned counsel, and contract judicial district or circuit level are Alabama x systems. Pronounced differences in usually multicounty, because judicial Alaska x program features are highlighted districts or circuits are usually Arizona x composed of several counties. For Arkansas x x when they vary signi ficantly by California x either geographic region or example, in Florida public defenders community size. are legislatively mandated in each of Colorado x Connecticut x the State's 20 judicial circuits. Delaware x Organization and types of However, the 20 defender offices Dist. of Columbia x defense systems serve 67 counties. Florida x Georgia x Given the almost infinite variations Finally, in six States indigent Hawaii x in level of organization and structure defense systems are organized on Idaho x of indigent defense systems, devel­ both a State and county level. For Illinois x oping a fixed typology is a difficult example, in Massachusetts a state­ Indiana x task. The Nation's programs have wide public defender organization is Iowa x been categorized according to two responsible for representing indi­ Kansas x x Kentucky x x basic criteria: gents in felony cases, while county Louisiana x 1. Level of organization (State, bar associations provide representa­ !\1aine x county, judicial circuit, or district) tion in misdemeanors at the lower Maryland x 2. Type of system (public defender, court level. Massachusetts x x assigned counsel, or contract). Michigan x Indigent defense services organized Minnesota x States' organizing systems on a State level are most common in !\1ississippi x the Northeast and West. There are Missouri'"' x x Most States organize indigent some interesting regional variations Montana x defense services on a county level. in organizational structure when the Nebraska x Based on data from this survey the Nevada x x level of organization of each State's New Hampshire x x level of organization of each State's indigent defense system is shown by indigent defensi.fystem was estab­ region (table 5). It is clear that the New Jersey x New Mexico x lished (table 4). Clearly, county­ Northeast and West lead the regions New York x organized defender syste",]s remain in State-organized indigent sys­ North Carolina x dominant today. In 25 States indi­ tems. By contrast, only the South North Dakota x gent defense services are organized and North Central regions organize Ohio x x on a county level exclusively; 13 indigent defense systems by circuit Oklahoma x States have services organized or judicial district. Oregon x exclusively at the State level. Pennsylvania x Assigned counsel systems still Rhode Island x Of the 13 defense syst1~s organized predominate in most counties. South Carolina x purely on a State level all are Defense systems may be structured South Dakota x structured as statewide public differently even if they share the Tennessee x Texas x defenders. same level of organization. The Utah x structure of indigent defense sys­ Vermont x These systems provide services tems rIJ.~y take any of the following Virginia x through satellite offices established forms: Washington x throughout the State. These pro­ o Public defender program estab­ West Virginia x x grams are further characterized by a lished as a public or private Wisconsin x central administrative component, nonprofit organization staffed by Wyoming x which is responsible for providing full-time or part-time salaried *~1issouri has adopted a statewide public statewide indigent defense ser- attorneys defender system since the time of this Q Assigned counselor ad hoc system survey in .\pril1982. 11 Information on the legal authority for the where private counsel are appointed establishment of indigent defense services in as needed from a list of available o Contract system in which individ­ each State is contained in the appendix. attorneys ual attorney(s), bar association(s), or 12l\1issouri also became a statewide system as private law firm(s) agree to provide of April 1, 1982. Three States are organized 13The appendix contains the statutory services for a specified amount exclusively at the judicial district level; the requirements for the establishment of indigent o Hybrid or combination system, remaining States are not organized exclusively defense services in each State. which may include any of the above on any 0 f the three levels. in any number of configurations. National Oiminai DtjellSe Systems Study 9 Types and characteristics of indigent defense systems

t s * . '11

In 1973 "The Other Face of Justice" mental units from their primary Survey results indicate little change reported that the primary method of obligation of providing indigent since the 1973 report. The majority providing representation in 71.6% of defense services by organizing and of counties (1,833 or 60%) continue all counties was through an assigned funding defender services at the to rely on an assigned counsel counsel system. The report went on State level." structure, and the States that had to identify 16 States that had subse­ taken over indigent defense services quently " ... relieved county govern- from the counties at the time of the 1973 study continue to provide or

Table 5. Level of organization of Table 6. Type of defense system by State indigent defense services by region

Region JUdicial Total number and district! of counties Public Assigned State State County circuit State in the State defender counsel Contract

Northeast 6 5 0 Total 3,082 1,048 1,833 201 Connecticut x (34%) (60%) (6%) Maine x Alabama 67 6 61 0 Massachusetts x )( Alaska 4 4 0 0 New Hampshire x x Arizona 14 2 5 7 New Jersey x Arkansas 75 18 57 0 New York )( California 58 49 0 9 Pennsylvania x Colorado 63 63 0 0 Rhode Island x Connecticut 8 8 0 0 Vermont x Delaware 3 3 0 0 North Central 2 10 3 District of Columbia I 1 0 0 Florida 67 67 0 0 Illinois x Indiana x Georgia 159 19 127 13 Iowa x Hawaii 4 4 0 0 Kansas x x Idaho 44 14 1 29 Michigan x Illinois 102 74 28 0 Minnesota x Indiana 92 44 44 4 Missouri x x Iowa 99 15 84 0 Nebraska x Kans&s 105 6 99 0 North Dakota x Kentucky 120 55 28 37 Ohio x x Louisiana 64 49 15 0 Sou th Dako ta x Maine 16 0 16 0 Wisconsin x Maryland 23 23 0 0 Massachusetts 14 12 2 0 South 5 4 12 Michigan 83 5 41 37 Alabama x Minnesota 87 42 45 0 Arkansas x x Mississppi 82 20 62 0 Delaware x District Missoul'i 114 20 94 0 37 15 of Columbia x Montana 56 4 93 26 62 5 Florida x Nebraska Nevada 17 15 0 2 Georgia x New Hampshire 10 4 6 0 Kentucky x x Louisiana x New Jersey 21 21 0 0 0 Maryland x New Mexico 32 16 16 55 7 0 Mississippi x New York 62 100 14 86 0 North Carolina x x North Carolina North Dakota 53 0 50 3 Oklahoma x South Carolina x Ohio 88 30 58 0 Tennessee x Oklahoma 77 2 66 9 20 3 Texas x Oregon 36 13 67 0 0 Virginia x Pennsylvania 67 5 5 0 0 West Virginia x x Rhode Island Sou th Carolina 46 39 7 0 0 West 6 8 South Dakota 66 2 64 0 Arizona x Tennessee 95 4 83 8 California x Texas 254 2 252 0 Colorado )( Utah 29 17 0 12 Hawaii x 14 8 0 6 x Vermont Idaho Virginia 104 5 99 0 x Montana Washington 39 6 31 2 Neveda x x West Virginia 55 0 55 0 New Mexico x Wisconsin 72 47 25 0 Oregon x Wyoming 23 23 0 0 Utah x Washington x Note: Numbers of counties under each system type are Wyoming x weighted estimates based on survey responses.

10 National Criminal Defense Systems Study £$4 #" fund representation through state­ lawyers are on salary with the local Table 7. Summary of total number of wide public defenders. It should be county. If they are on salary the counties using each type of indigent noted, however, that while the ma­ program is categorized as public defense system jority of States use assigned counsel, defender; if they are paid on some very few use this system exclusive­ other fee basis the program is des­ Number of counties ly. Instead, the majority of States ignated as a contract. Furthermore, System type represented us,.! combination of systems (table there is a need to distinguish 6). between assigned counsel and con­ Total 3,082 tract programs. If a group of private Assigned counsel 1,833 One-third of all counties provide attorneys receives their appoint­ Public defender 1,048 indigent defense services through ments directly from a judge and then Contract 201 public defender service. Some 1,048 submits their vouchers to the funding Percent of counties (34%) in the nation are source, they are classified as assign­ counties served by public defenders (table ed counsel; otherwise, they are served 6). More detailed analysis discloses considered a contract program. Total 100% that 250 of those counties, or 25%, are served by a statewide public In preparing the survey instrument, Assigned counsel 60 Public defender 34 defender system. In addition, four distinct groups of private Contract 6 Florida, Illinois, and Pennsylvania lawyers were identified who might mandate by legislation that there be be participating in a contract public defender programs in another system: individual practitioners, a gated to continue to provide repre­ 180 counties in those three States. law firm or group of attorneys who sentation until their contract period band together to secure a contract, a ends. Results revealed a new type of sys­ bar association, or a nonprofit organ­ tem for providing indigent dafense: ization. Contracts also may take The number and percentage of coun­ The contract system. Although the many forms. Three have been iden­ ties in the United States having each apparent frequency of assigned coun­ tified. First, a group of lawyers may of the three types of systems are sel and public defender systems enter into a fixed-price contract given in table 7. remains relatively unchanged since where representation will be pro­ the last national survey, a heretofore vided in a specified number of cases Re[?,ional variations in systems for unreported program structure has for a fixed amount per case. A so­ providing indigent defense emerged: The contract system. Ap­ called cost plus fixed-fee contract is parently, in 1973 the contract sys­ one where representation is provided Assigned counsel systems are con­ tem simply did not exist, but it has at an estimated cost per case until centrated in the North Central and become increasingly popular in the the contract is out of money. At Southern regions, whereas public last 2 to 3 years. At the time of our that point it may be renegotiated, defenders predominate in the North­ study in 1982, 201 counties (about but private lawyer:.; are under no east and West. Significant differ­ 6% nationally) provided indigent obligation to continue to provide ences occur in program type by representation through a contract representation. The final type of region (table 8). Detailed regional system. contract is called ''block grant." breakdowns showing each State are Under this type of contract, the shown in table 9. To some extent Details on the characteristics of private attorneys agree to provide these differences may reflect the contract systems are presented later representation in all types of cases legislative mandate requiring public in this chapter. However, because in the county for a fixed amount. If defender programs in some States. this is a relatively new phenomenon, the volume of crime increases sub­ For example, five Northeastern some explanation here may be help­ stantially, there is no escape hatch, States have statewide public defend- ful. First, a contract does not re­ and the contract lawyers are obIi- fer to a legal document that binds an indigent defense program to its Table 8. Type of defense system by census region funding source. A public defender may have a contract with the local Public Assigned Total county, but that program would be Region defender counsel Contract counties categorized as public defender rather than contract. The distin·' Total 1,048 1,833 200 3,082 guishing feature is whether the (34"6) (59%) (6%) 10096 Northeast 180 31 6 217 (83%) (14%) (3%) 100% 14For simplifica tion, this entire discussion of North Central 311 694 49 1,054 types of systems separates counties into one of (30%) (66%) (5%) 100% the three categories of indigent defense (public South 327 998 67 1,392 defender, assigned counsel, or contract). The (23%) (72%) (5%) 10096 category refers only to the predominant system West 230 110 78 419 for a given county or State; in actuality, other (55%) (26%) (19%) 100% indigent defense systems often supplement the predominant one.

National Criminal Defense Systems Study 11 Types and characteristics of indigent defense systems

A S ..M." - er systems, and Pennsylvania man­ Table 9. Regional analysis oC type{s) oC defense system(s) used dates a public defender program in each of its counties. Similarly, in Number of counties using:: the West statewide public defender Region and State Public Assigned programs serve more than 125 coun­ defender counsel Contract Total ties in the five States. In addition, Total 1,048 1,833 201 3,082 California counties have consistently (34%) (60%) (6%) (100%) chosen public defender programs. In Northeast 180 31 6 217 other States, however, legislation (83%) (14%) (3%) (100%) may prohibit establishing public Connecticu t 8 0 0 8 defender offices in counties having Maine 0 16 0 16 less than a specified population or Massachusetts 12 2 0 14 may require such offices in counties New Hampshire 4 6 0 10 New Jersey 21 0 0 21 with populations above a given fig­ New York 55 7 0 62 ure. Thus, it is not surprising that Pennsylvania 67 0 0 67 assigned counsel systems are more Rhode Island 5 0 0 5 common in the South and North Cen­ Vermont 8 0 6 14 tral regions, which have few large South 327 498 67 1,392 metropolitan counties. (23%) (72%) (5%) (100%) Alabama 6 61 0 67 Arkansas 18 57 0 75 As discussed previously, only about Delaware 3 0 0 3 6% of all counties in the Nation have District contract programs with attorneys to of Columbia 1 0 0 1 provide indigent defense services. Florida 67 0 0 67 Counties in three states (Idaho, Georgia 19 127 13 159 Kentucky, and Michigan) account for Kentucky 55 28 37 120 Louisiana 49 15 0 64 more than one-half of thos,e using Maryland 23 0 0 23 contracts. Mississippi 20 62 0 82 North Carolina 14 86 0 100 Variations by county size in systems Oklahoma 2 66 9 77 for providing indigent defense South Carolina 39 7 0 46 Tennessee 4 83 8 95 Texas 2 252 0 254 Small counties are more apt to use Virginia 5 99 0 104 assigned counsel and contract West Virginic 0 55 0 55 systems. Assigned counsel systems North Central 311 694 49 1,054 predominate in small counties with (30%) (66%) (5%) (100%) less than 50,000 residents, where Illinois 74 28 0 102 there may not be a sufficient volume Indiana 44 44 4 92 Iowa 15 84 0 99 of cases to support the costs of a Kansas 6 99 0 105 public defender program with a Michigan 5 41 37 83 salaried staff of assistant public Minnesota 42 45 0 87 defender attorneys (table 10). Missouri 20 94 0 114 Nebraska 26 62 5 93 Furthermore, over two-thirds of all North Dakota 0 50 3 53 Ohio 30 58 0 88 contract systems are found in coun­ South Dakota 2 64 0 66 ties with populations of less than Wisconsin 47 25 0 72 50,000. Contract systems, particu­ West 230 110 78 419 larly those located in sparsely (55%) (26%) (19%) (100%) populated counties, may use a con­ Alaska 4 0 0 4 tract system to place an absolute Arizona 2 5 7 14 budget limitation on indigent defense California 49 0 9 58 Colorado 63 0 0 63 services. This is particularly impor­ Hawaii 4 0 0 4 tant to a smaller county, because a Idaho 14 1 29 44 single complex felony case in a given Montana 4 37 15 56 year may exceed the total budget Nevada 15 0 2 17 allocated for that year. New Mexico 16 16 0 32 Oregon 13 20 3 36 Utah 17 0 12 29 In response to this survey, one Washington 6 31 2 39 county reported that expenditures Wyoming 23 0 0 23 for each of 3 years totaled $557.95, $3,509.26, and $2,425.25 under an Note: Since the time of this survey, sys- have changed in some States. Refer to the assigned counsel system. In the terns for delivery of indigent defense services discussion on changes in chapter IV.

12 National Criminal D~nse Systems Study %11 au 5#'* following year a homicide was com­ mitted and three individuals were Table 10. Type of indigent defense system by size of county P

Natlonal Cn"minal Defense Systelns Study 13 Types and characteristics of indigent defense systems

iiiIIIiiJ iN2 H """"""'"

Percentage of counties vs. Table 11. Type of defense system Cor the lllrgest 50 counties in the United States percentage of population served Total Public Assigned by indigent defense systems County/State population defender counsel C:ontract

Total 69,433,406 Percent Percent of total population (31.56%) 100 Number of programs 43 9 3 pprC~-Hlt :1t Los Angeles, Calif. 7,477,657 o Cl1untlt-lS Cook, Ill. 5,253,190 x 90 ~t"r,;f'll1 Harris, Texas 2,409,544 x Wayne, Mich. a 2,337,240 x x Kings, N.Y. 2,230,936 x 80 P~rLen~ DI o D')Pul.ltl()fl Orange, Calif. 1,931,570 x sPll.'ed Queens, N. Y. 1,891,325 x ?:J San Diego, Calif. b 1,861,846 x x Philadelphia, Pa. 1,688,210 x Dade, Fla. 1,625,979 x 60 Dallas, Texas 1,556,549 x Maricopa, Ariz. 1,508,030 x 50 Cuyahoga, Ohio 1,498,295 x Baltimore, Md. 1,452,390 x Allegheny, Pa. 1,450,085 x 40 St. Louis, Mo. 1,427,900 x New York, N. Y. 1,427,533 x Middlesex, Mass. c 1,367,034 x x 30 Nassau, N.Y. 1,321,582 x Santa Clara, Calif. 1,295,071 x 20 Suffolk, N. Y. 1,284,231 x King, Wash. 1,269,749 x Bronx, 1-1. Y. 1,169,115 x 10 Alameda, Calif. 1,105,379 x Erie, N.Y. 1,015,472 x x Broward, Fla. 1,014,043 x 0 Oakland, Mich. 1,011,793 x Public Assl~ned G--,ntr(l;.:t 988,800 detende' COtJnSpl 5',S!t1 m Bexar, Texas x system 'j'/Sh-~m '\1i!waukee, Wis. 964,988 x Hennepin, Minn. 941,411 x San Bernadino, Cali f. 893,157 x Hamilton, Ohio 873,136 x Franklin, Ohio 869,109 x Westchester, Nd Y. 866,599 x Characteristics of public defender 860,880 x x systems Tarrant, Texas Essex, N.J. 850,451 x Bergen, N.J. 845,385 x Even among States that are served Hartford, Conn. 807,766 x almost exclusively by public defend­ Fairfield, Conn. 807,143 x er programs, there is a grea t deal of Sacramento, Calif. 783,381 x variation (table 13). Public defender Shelby, Tenn. 777,113 x systems differ according to whether Honolulu, Hawaii 767,874 x they- \larion, Ind. 765,233 729,023 x d are funded exclusively by the State Fairfax, Va. 728,409 x or also receive county dollars Pinnelas, Fla. o are administered on a central or '\lonroe, N. Y. 702,238 x "'lacomb, \lich. 694,600 x local basis Jefferson, Ky. 684,793 x o establish offices with salaried staff San Francisco, Calif. 678,974 x in every county or substitute private Jefferson, Ala. 671,197 x bar services in sparsely populated areas. aWayne County, \1ichigan, has a variety of represen ta lion in the Superior Court is indigent defender programs, including both handled by the State public defender, with gublie def"nder and assigned counsel. district and juvenile cases contracted out to In many States, public defenders are In San Diego County, ('aliforina, at the 8;e county bar associations. funded exclusively by State govern­ timE' of th(' ~tudy, there was a private In Tarrant County, Texas, there is a small ment. Funding for public defenders ,l",fendel' system handling about 25'\) of the public defe'lder program and a large in Florida, Nevada, and Wyoming is C'lIses wi th the I;>a lancE' in contracts to the assigned counsel program. nriv,lte bar. Source: 1980 Census data from States and supplemented by the counties. By l!ln \liddlesex ('ounty, \lassa('hus('tt~, felony ('ounties. contrast, in Illinois and Pennyslvania public defenders are exclusively funded by counties.

14 National Criminal Defense Systems Study ifi " ! L 4 §# At A" ""'" 3:1 "'" l Table 12. Percent of counties v. percent of population served Table 14. Summary of public by each type of indigent defense system by region defender system characteristics

public defenders Assigned counsel Contracts Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent of public of of pop- of of pop- of of pop- defender Region counties ulation counties ulation counties ulation-- Characteristics counties Northeast 83% 95"6 14% 4% 3% 1% Affiliation North Central 30 64 66 32 5 4 County government 38% South 23 45 72 52 5 3 State executive agency 25 West 55 82 26 3 19 15 Judiciary 23 lndependen t nonpro fit Source: 1980 Census data. organization 8 Other 6 Chief public defenders Table 13. Variation among States with predominant public defender systems Full-time 78 Part-time 22 Funding: source Administration Service area Number of full-time Select staff attorneys Cen- Decen- Entire counties 0 24 State State County tralized tralized State only 1-6 59 7-20 10 Alaska x x x 21-50+ 7 Colorado x x x Connecticut x x x Support sta ffing Delaware x x x Secretaries 86 Florida x x x x Investiga tors 58 Hawaii x x x Administrative assistants 18 Illinois x x x Law students 16 Maryland x x x Paralegal employees 10 Massachusetts x x x Social workers 9 Nevada x x" x x x Fiscal officer 6 New Hampshire x x x Training director 3 New Jersey x x x Salary ranges Pennsylvania x x x Full-time chief Rhode Island x x x public defenders Vermont x x x $6,000-66,000 (yearly) Wisconsin x x x $20,000-30,000 (modal) Wyoming x x x x

"In Nevada a State public defender public defender organizations serving a Chief public defender salaries are organization serves most of the counties. small number of counties. However, there are also a few indigent low compared to chief prosecutors. Chief prosecutors for the most part receive a higher salary than chief Administration of public defenders established under legislation are public defenders. In only 11 % of the is centralized in many States. How­ typically a branch of the executive counties served by public defenders ever, in Florida, Illinois, and agency. About 8% of the counties do chief public defenders earn more Pennsylvania, public defenders are served by a public defender reported than $50,000 per year. By contrast, administered by independent agen­ that the program was an independ­ chief prosecutors command this cies at the local level. Varying ent, nonprofit organiza tion. same higher salary in 42% of public features of public defender systems defender counties. Higher salaried are discussed in the following Public defender program staffing chief public defenders as well as paragraphs (summary of features, chief prosecutors are more likely to table 14). Chief public defenders are usually be found in larger counties. employed on a full-time basis. In the Public defender program affiliation majority of counties served by public Arguments have prevailed over the defenders the chief public defender years as to whether these salaries Most public defender programs are works on a full-time basis (78% of all should be comparable. Public part of the county government. counties). Generally, as county defender advocates insist on parity Nationally, public defender programs population increases, so does the to be able to recruit and retain the most often are part of the county likelihood that the chief will be full most qualified attorneys. Prosecu­ government, as indicated by 38% of time. Among public defender coun­ tors, on the other hand, state that counties served by public defend­ ties with populations of more than their responsibility is substantially ers. However, public defenders also 250,000, 93% have a full-time chief larger than that of chief public may be affiliated with other govern­ public defender, whereas the same is defenders, because the prosecutor is ment agencies such as the judiciary true for only 77% or fewer counties responsible for all categories of (23%) or a Statp. executive agency with less than 250,000 residents. defendants and not just for indi­ (25%). Statewide defender systems gents. In addition, many prosecutors have civil law requirements.

National Criminal DejellSe Systems Study 15 Types and characteristics of indigent defense systems

=z:== IF .. ",. S* 'f" m e iRMA

Salaries of full-time chief public part-time staff--are likely to be defenders start as low as $6,000 per Number of full-time lawyers employed by public defenders. by region found in smalI- to medium-size Year , while survey results ,indicate counties (populations of less than that the lowest paid full-tIme prose­ 250,000). cutor received a salary of $18,500. Large staff (21 or more lawyers) The highest salary reported by chief Support staff publie defenders in the survey was Medium staH (7·20 lawyers) $66,000, while a number of chief :'.. Small staH (1·6 lawyers) Most public defenders employ inves­ prosecutors were reported to have tigators and secretaries. On the ~. (0 lawyers) salaries above that figure. In 38% of other hand, the majority of public the public defender counties, chief defender counties do not employ public defenders earn $20,000 to social workers, paralegal employees, $30 000 per year. Regionally, it law students, administrative assist­ app~ars that chief defenders in , ants, indig;tlllcy screeners, fiscal Northeastern and Western countIes, officers, or training directors. where statewide defender systems Again, as county pOl?ulatio~ si~e are concentrated, earn higher increases the grea ter the likelihood salaries than in other areas. of finding any of these categories of additional staff. Except for social Typically, public defender programs workers and law students, public have small staffs. The number of defender counties in the North Cen­ staff attorneys employed by public tral regions were consistently more defender programs ranged from 0 to unlikely than those in other regions more than 50. In fact, only 16 public to hire additional type of support defenders who responded to the sur­ staff. vey employ more than 50 full-time attorneys. In the sample of 321 Predominant staffing patterns of public defender programs, 4,428 , public defender systems may be lawyers are employed on a full-tIme sum marized as follows: basis and 659 are part-time. As G Chief public defenders are usually expected, the number of lawyers employed on a full-time basis employed (on either a full-time or • Most public defender offices have part-time basis) increases as cou,nty a small full-time staff of 1 to 6 population increases. However, It attorneys appears that public defender offices, 10 o Investigators and secretaries are typically have small staffs. ApprOXI­ typically the only support staff mately 75% of all counties served by employed by a large number of public defenders reported employing public defender programs three or fewer full-time lawyers. Overall North· N

16 National Criminal Defense Systems Study ... " counsel systems. Ad hoc assigned eligible and willing attorneys is of the country. Only 19% of assign­ counsel systems are those in which essential to assigned counsel sys­ ed counsel counties indicated that individual private attorneys are tems. In 88% of all counties served attorneys were categorized by spe­ appointed by individual judges and by assigned counsel such a list is cialty, with counties most likely provide representation on a case-by­ maintained. In particular, all of the to do so being in the West (43%) and case basis. Coordinated assigned largest counties with populations Northeast (29%), where statewide counsel systems are those that above 500,000 maintain such a list. public defender systems are employ an administrator who over­ concentrated. sees the system and attempts to Attorneys are not usually cate­ develop a set of guidelines and gorized on assigned counsel lists. Assigned counsel lists most often are procedures. However, only 25% of Generally, lawyers are not cate­ based on attorneys who affirmatively all respondents who labeled their gorized by specialization. Typically, volunteer. Lawyers are included on programs as assigned counsel con­ where specialization exists it is assigned counsel lists in a variety of sider themselves to be coordinated based on the seriousness of the ways. Most commonly, those attor­ assigned counsel programs. case. For example, in one large neys who affirmatively volunteer al·e metropolitan county in the West, included. Among assigned counsel The administration of assigned attorneys are categorized according counties 43% reported using this counsel programs varies. In the to the following types of cases, method to identify counsel willing to typical ad hoc assigned counsel listed in descending order of serious­ represent indigents. North Central system the only administrative ness: death penalty, serious felony, counties are more likely to use this effort is that provided by the felony, and misdemeanor or juve­ method (43%). appointing judge or perhaps his or nile. Lawyers typically are eligible her clerk. In other systems, the to handle more serious cases after In about a third of assigned counsel assigned counsel program may representing defendants in a number counties lawyers who volunteer and operate as a part of the local activi­ of less serious cases. Although there are either determined to be qualified ties of a bar association. In a has been a great deal of nationwide by administrative personnel or to number of jurisdictions the public discussion concerning specialization continue their training are included defender organization is charged (as well as accreditation), few quali­ on assigned counsel lists. Assigned with establishing and administering fying proceduress exist in most areas counsel counties in the South are the assigned counsel program. In least likely to rely on these attor­ these cases it is important to sepa­ neys for indigent representations. Table 15. Summary characteristics of rate the functions of the salaried assigned counsel systems Some counties rely on more than one public defender activity from the of these methods for compiling assigned counsel activity to assure Percent of assigned counsel lists. that no problem develops over the assigned question of a conflict of interest counsel Characteristics As a rule, there are no formal among two or more defendants. counties procedures by which attorneys are Administrative removed from assigned counsel lists Finally, it is important to define Ad hoc (appointments (85% of assigned counsel counties the distinctions between a coordi­ made by individual answered "no" to this question). In nated assigned counsel system and a judges, clerks, public defenders, or others) 75% fact, none of the assigned counsel contract system. The distinction Coordinated 25 counties in the Northeast reported becomes the most difficult, for removal procedures. Among the 15% example, when the local bar associ­ Lists of available attorneys of assigned counsel counties that do ation is charged with providing the o Compiled on basis of:· have formal removal procedures, private bar representation. The Lawyers who affirmatively North Central and Southern counties distinction made in this survey is volunteer 43 most commonly have them. The simple. If the bar association enters Inclusion of all lawyers 35 relatively rare existence of removal into a contract with the funding Volunteers who qualify 27 Volunteers who participate procedures is consistent with data on source to provide the representation in continuing legal field visits conducted on other under a plan developed and adminis­ education 8 contracts over the past 51/2years. tered by the association, it is a o Categorized according to Traditionally many judges are reluc­ contract program (a summary of attorneys' specialization tant to remove any lawyer from the assigned-counsel program features, in lists 19 o Established procedures list for virtually any kind of table 15). for formal removal 15 infraction. Other judges question Case load whether they have the authority to Compiling assigned counsel lists Cases distributed do so. Private bar associations among most of the frequently share the same reluc­ Most assigned counsel cOlmties have attorneys on the list 44 tance, and thus formal procedures of lists of available attorneys. Clearly, Average of 1 to 10 removal are rare. not all members of the private bar cases per are willing or qualified to represent assigned counsel 75 indigent defendants. Thus, a list of ·Total exceeds 100% because multiple I methods are used. I

National Criminal Drifense Systems Study 17 Types and characteristics of indigent defense systems

,... = gg i$ Judges typically make actual appointments of attorneys. In Table 16. Distribution of cases among assigned counsel by region over two-thirds of assigned counsel Percent of Jaw:lers assigner! cases counties in the sample, judges are Percent of :';!orc than responsible for the actual appoint­ coun ties in region 0-20% 21-50% 51-75% 75% ment of private counsel. Other All U.S. counties 13 26 17 44 parties responsible for appointing Northeast 18 12 0 70 private counsel include public North Central 10 36 26 28 defenders, clerks, or individuals South 12 1:; 10 64 responsible for administering and West 29 35 9 27 maintaining assigned counsel lists.

One-fourth of assigned counsel 16). Similarly, cases are more likely counsel were compensated for evel'y programs are coordinated by an to be assigned to fewer lawyers in case in which they receive an administrator. The survey asked larger counties. appointment. The vast majority of assigned counsel programs whether programs responded to t,is question or not they had an administrator Not surprisingly, because most in the affirmative. In 11 programs, other than a judge or court clerk. assigned counsel progrums spread the assigned counsel were reported to be Approximately 25% of these pro­ work among many of the lawyers, uncompensated in about one-half the grams answered in the affirmative. the average number of cases each cases, and 1 pl'ogram indicated that This response is consistent with the attorney handled during our survey compensation was not available in fact that 25% of all assigned counsel period was small. About three­ more than one-half the cases. In 39 programs identified themselves as quarters of all assigned counsel counties the programs indicated that coordinated assigned counsel pro­ counties assigned an average of only lawyers were not compensated at the 1 to 10 cases per attorney in ] 982. gr~ms. Programs reporting the time when public funds ran out. In eXistence of such an administrator most cases, however, these vouchers were signi fi can tly higher in the Assigned counsel fees were paid sometime in the future, Northeast (63%) than in any other frequently through a supplemental region of the country. Most assigned counsel counties pay appropriation. lawyers on a separate out-of-court/ Distribution of caseload among in-court hourly basis. Members of Judicial discretion plays an assigned counsel the private bar are compensated for important role in determining indigent defense work in a variety of assigned counsel compensation. Given that a number of private ways. Almost 75% of all counties Rates for assigned counsel are attorneys will have either volun­ reported paying on a separate out­ established in a variety of ways teered or been automatically includ­ of-court and in-court hourly basis. (table 17). In a number of States ed on lists to represent indigents, the Frequently the rate of hourly pay is legislation requires that private way in which cases are distributed less in misdemeanor and juvenile attorneys receive reasonable com­ among all available assigned counsel cases than it is in felony cases. A pensation fOI' work in indigent in any particular county is of second method of payment for the cases. However, broad discretion interest. The equitable distribution priva te bar is a set fee for a par­ may remain with the appointing of cases is a major issue among ticular type of apearance. Thus, for judge to set the precise fee. In some assigned counsel programs. Under­ example, a court may pay $50 for jurisdictions, it was reported that standably, if appointments are made each arraignment, $100 for the entry judges in the same court set differ­ consistently to only a handful of of a guilty plea, $150 per day for ent fees for the same type of cases. lawyers, questions of favoritism may trial, and $250 per day for appeal. A In many States, fees are established be raised. Thus, most private third method is to establish a fixed by a combination of methods. For attorneys providing indigent defense fee for the type of case assigned. example, Tennessee's compensation feel that the fairest way to make For example, one jurisdiction pays a schedule for assigned counsel is assignments is simply on an alpha­ flat fee of $250 for a misdemeanor determined by statute, whereas its betical rotation. On the whole it and $750 for a felony, regardless of misdemeanor rates are subject to appears that in a plurality of the the seriousness of the case or the both judicial discretion and custom assigned counsel counties in the amount of time necessary to prepare in the jurisdiction. Other means of Nation (44%), cases are assigned to the case adequately. setting assigned counsel fees (listed over three-quarters of the available in descending order of frequency) lawyers. Regionally, however, there Assigned counsel are compensated include: statutes, statewide court are some interestil'5 differences. for indigent defense, even though rule, public defender, or custom in Assigned counsel counties in the payment is sometimes deferred. the jurisdiction. West and North Central regions ap­ Because of growing nationwide pear more likely than other areas to concerns from the private bar, one A considerable range exists in assign cases to fewer lawyers (table survey question was designed to assigned counsel hourly fees for determine whether private assigned felonies and misdemeanors (table 17). Hourly rates for out-of-court

18 National Criminal Defense Systems Study ;:1 work in both felony and misdemeanor cases range from $10 to $65 per Table 17. Summary of features of assigned cOWlSel compensation hour, with $20 to $30 per hour being Compensation Number or states"' the most common fee. On the other Methods of establishing fees: hand, the maximum hourly rates o Judicial discretion 34 o Statute 27 differ for in-court misdemeanor and o statewide court rule 11 "felony work. Maximum hourly fees I! Public defender 9 for in-court misdemeanor work are o Custom in jurisdiction 23 $50 per hour, whereas for felonies Percentage of assigned they are as high as $65 per hour. Type of fees s(:hedulcs used council counties The higher maximum for in-court o Separate out-of-court/in-court hourly rates 70% felony work understandably reflects o Flat fee per case 11% the more complicated and time­ o Type of appearance 7% consuming nature of more serious o Other 9% cases. The most common fee for in­ Hourly fees for felonies Range Most common court felony and misdemeanor cases In-court $12.50-$65 $30-$40 is the same: $30 to $50 per hour. Out-of-court $10-$50 $20-$30 Hourly fees for misdemeanors In-court $12.50-$50 $30-$40 The examination of assigned counsel Out-of-court $10-$50 $20-$30 compensation must not only take hourly fees into account but also Percentage of assigned Stipulation of maximum amount council counties total maximum amounts stipulated Felonies 4096 for both felony and misdemeanor Misdemeanors 5096 cases. If the maximum amount Range Most common Maximum fees " allowed is extremely low the range Felonies $200-$2,500 $500-$1,000 of hourly fees becomes less impor­ (not including capital cases) tant. For example, hourly rates for Misdemeanors $100-$2,500 $200-$500 in-court work in Arkansas are "'Because the survey question permitted multiple relatively high at $50 per hour. responses, the number of States exceeds 50. However, by statute, the total compensation for assigned counsel cannot exceed $350. counsel counties pay assigned Characteristics of contract systems counsel on one of the following Survey responses indicated maximum bases: flat fee per appearance or Throughout the country 201 counties (6%) are estimated to provide pri­ fees were established by 40% of the type of appearance. counties for felony cases and by 50% mary indigent defense services of the counties for misdemeanor through contracts with individual Assigned counsel exist in almost private attorneys, local bar associ­ cases. The range in minimum fees two-thirds of all counties in the for felonies and misdemeanors and ations, nonprofit organizations, or United States and serve one-third of law firms or groups of lawyers joined the most common maximum fees are the Nation's population. The fol­ shown in table 17. Beginning as low for purposes of securing a contract. lowing is a summary of the features In many cases the county may con­ as $100, maximum assigned counsel of assigned counsel systems: fees in States such as Indiana can go tract with a number of individual o Lists of available attorneys are attorneys. During the survey year, as high as $5,000 for cases involving compiled in most counties capital offenses. Generally, the San Diego, California-the county o Lists are typically based on attor­ with the largest contract system in maximum for felonies falls between neys who affirmatively volunteer, $500 and $1,000. For misdemeanors the country-contracted out more but the lists do not categorize than 25 000 cases to 200 individual maximum fees are lower than for lawyers by specialization felonies, typically falling between private 'attorneys, 10 law firms, and II Judges are usually responsible for 1 private, nonprofit organization. $200 and $500. making appointments and they exer­ cise a fair amount of discretion in Almost one-fourth of those counties The second most common type of fee establishing compensation for assign­ reporting a program of contract schedule for assigned counsel is a ed counsel defense were counties with a pri­ flat fee per case. A flat fee per o Appointments appear to be distrib­ mary public defender program and case is paid to assigned counsel in uted among most of the available with the contract designed exclu­ about 10% of all the counties for lawyers, and each attorney handles a sively for conflict and unavailability felony work and in about 12% of. all small number of cases (1 to 10) per counties for misdemeanors. ASSIgn­ cases. A trend in California toward year this type of system .is growing .. Simi­ ed counsel fee schedules for about o Most counties pay assigned counsel larly, in Pennsylvama all countIes 80% of the counties are either' flat on a separate out-of-court/in-court must provide primary representation fees per case (10%) or separated hourly basis, with hourly fees ranging through a public defender program, out-of-court/in-court hourly rates from $10 to $65 per hour. but many of the counties ~ont.r~ct (70"6). The remaining assigned out for confli'!t and unavaIlabIlIty cases.

National Criminal Difellse Systems Study 19 Types and characteristics of indigent defense systems

;m'ITl!/iil'l!l':W = Competitive bids are solicited in tracts to bar associations. Likewise, Table 18. Summary of contract system one-half th_ counties providing features the few contracts that are awarded represen ta tion through contracts (by only 2% vf all contract counties) (table 18). Counties in the West Percent of to nonprofit organizations are appear more likely than other contract awarded only by Northeastern, regions to solicit these types of bids, System features counties Western, and the larger contract whereas counties in the South are counties. Such awards are made least likely to solicit competitive Awarding agency exclusively in Northeastern and County 56'6 bids. In the vast majority of cases Judge 22 Western contract counties. More­ the competition is not over the Public defender 19 over, a dramaticalty higher number question of costs. In virtually all Other 3 of Northeast contract counties­ cases of counties using contract Type of bid almost one-half-report bar associa­ syste"ms either the total annual cost Competitive 50 tion awards. This is primarily or a stated cost per case is given. Sole source 50 because 11 of the 14 counties in Competition centers around qualifi­ Types of groups Massachusetts provide lower court cations of the bidders and the awarded contracts representation through contracts methods that they propose to provide Individual practioners 62 with local bar associations. Law firms 30 quality representation. Frequently, Bar associations 3 even though the contract is put out Nonprofit organizations 2 Average number of cases awarded to for bid, only one law firm will file Other 3 contract attorneys an application. Some respondents Type of contract awarded" report this is because of the belief Block grant 54 The average caseload of contract that the county has already made a Fixed price 35 attorneys appears to be bimodal. choice before the bids are submitted. Cost plus fixed fee 11 The largest percentage of contract Other 7 counties (38%) reported awarding an In the remaining half of the counties, "More than one type of contract was average of between 100 and 2S0 where competition does not occur in reported in some counties. cases per attorney. However, almost contracting, the county negotiates one-fourLh reported awarding an its contract with a single lawyer or average of only 1 to 10 cases per law firm. Several cases reported in contracts. A significantly higher contract attorney. Futhermore, the survey involve a group of private number of contract counties in the there are marked regional trends. attorneys approaching the county West (79%) reported that the county Northeastern and North Central and offering to perform all of the is responsible for awarding con­ contract counties appear to award work during the coming year for a tracts. In slightly over one-half small contracts of only 10 to 100 fixed annual fee. Often, this fee is of Southern (52%) and Northeastern cases per attorney while their less than the county paid the (S6%) contract counties, public Southern and Western counterparts previous year for a public defender defenders make contract award seem more likely to award large system or assigned counsel system. decisions. Judges make contract contracts of 100 to 2S0 cases per Contract systems have been adopted award decisions in most North practitioner. These figures must be far more frequently in counties with Central contract counties (70°6)" interpreted with caution, however, existing assigned counsel systems Finally, the State or some other because contract counties are the than in those with public defender agency awards contracts in only 3% rarest of all program types and very systems. of all contract counties. few respondents were able to furnish the information. Agency responsible for awarding Types of groups awarded contracts contracts for indigent defense to provide indigent representation Types of contracts awarded services Contracts are most often awarded to Block grants are the most common County agencies are usually individual practitioners. Most type of contract award. Block responsible for making contract contracts are awarded to individual grants, as indicated by slightly over awards. In those counties with practitioners. Almost three-fourths one-half of contract counties, are contract programs the survey asked of all contract counties award the most com mon type of contracts which governmental units, agenciea, contracts to independent attorneys. awarded. Northeastern and smaller or individuals were primarily Awards to individual practitioners contract counties are most likely to responsible for awarding such are most common in Western con­ award block grants and Southern contracts. County agencies were tract counties (74'16) and in small contract counties least likely. responsible for the award in over contract counties of les~ than 50,000 Fixed-price contracts, reported by one-half of the cases (S6%). In about popula tion (71 %). approximately one-third of all one-fourth of contract counties a contract counties, are the second judge makes award decisions, and in Law firms are awarded contracts in most common type of award and are another one-fifth of counties the another one-third of all contract used most heavily by Southern and public defender awards contracts. counties and are most common in the larger (over SOO,OOO population) Regions vary in which agency is North Central region. Overall, only contract counties. The remaining given responsibility for awarding 3% of contract counties award con-

20 National Criminal Defense Systems Study 8 contract counties issue cost plus fixed fee or some other type of contract. Contract monitoring

Contracts for indigent defense ser­ vices are monitored by an agency or individual other than the one which made the initial award in only about one-half of all contract counties (46%). Contract monitoring appears to be most likely in Northeastern and Southern contract counties. Con­ tracts may be monitored for any of the following reasons: o to ensure quality of representation G to conduct budget review o to approve vouchers o to determine client satisfaction.

National Ctiminal Defense Systems Study 21 Chapter III Indigent defense expenditures and caseloads

i. ,.

Accurate expenditure and caseload served in 1982-and on the number of information is essential for govern­ indigent defendants served per 1,000 ments to provide "... sufficient funds population. Finally, expenditure and for the assistance of counsel to per­ caseload data are combined to pro­ sons accused of crimes and who are vide national estimates of cost per unable to afford legal representa­ case in the Nation as a whole, by tion" (Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 region and State, and in the 50 U.S. 25 (1972». In 1976 the ~eport largest counties. of the National Study CommIssion on Defense Services stated, "Just one Elq>enditures for indigent defense decade ago, only $16.9 million was spent annually for the defense of Expenditure information presented in poor persons accused of crime. A this chapter was derived through a conservative estimate of the total series of steps, beginning with amount being spent today (1976) on collecting individual county costs. defense :i1fvices to the poor is $200 Information on county expenditures million." The most recent esti­ was collected from two sources in mates developed for the American this survey. First, questionnaires Bar Association study, Criminal were sent to all counties in the Defense Services for the Poor, sample known to provide funds to placed 1980 expenditures for indi­ indigent defense programs. Obvious­ gent defense in the United r~ates at ly, those counties in which indigent a total of $435,869 million. How­ defense is funded exclusively by the ever, because rough estimates were State were excluded. As previously used to derive a number of individual indicated. completed questionnaires States' costs, this natioll!l~figure was were obt~ined in 490 of the 494 considered conser va tive. counties for a response rate of more than 99%. The second source of This chapter presents national and county expenditure data was sample State-by-State estimates of the total programs cost information, listing amount of dollars spent in the State sources of funding and the amount courts for indigent defense services provided by each. in 1982, the year covered by this survey. Also examined are State, Expenditure information from the regional, and other variations in per county and program questionnaires capita funding for indigent defense was then compared. If the two services. Per capita costs can at responses varied by 10% or more, times be misleading, however, be­ follow-up calls were made to clarify cause the need for indigent defense the discrepancies. While large services is known to differ among discrepancies were not frequent, communities of different size and in when they did occur the financial different parts of the country. data reported by the counties proved Therefore, data also are presented to be more reliable than similar data on total caseload-number of indi­ reported by the programs. Conse­ gent defendants reported to be quently, in these instances county­ reported expenditures were given 15National Legal Aid and Defender Association preference over program-reported (NLADA), Guidelines for Legal Defense county expenditures. Once county Systems in the United States, Report of the. expenditures were complete for each National Study Commission on Defense Ser°,clces of the sample counties in a State, (Washington, D.C.: NLADA,1976). they were given appropriate weights, 16Norman Lefstein, Criminal Defense Services and a State-by-State estimate was for the Poor (Washington, D.C.: American Bar Association Standing Committee on Legal Aid developed. In two Sta tes, Iowa and and Indigent Defendants, 1982), p. 10. Oklahoma, secondary State-level data on county expenditures were 17 Estimates for 1980 based on limited data were used in many States. The data collection provided to us, and in those two effort consisted of reviewing available reports instances these data were sub­ and other data from the various States as well stituted for the weighted State as limited telephone followup with knowledge­ estimates. able people at the State level. The present survey was designed specifically to overcome the deficiencies of previous efforts in order to provide more bccurate national estimates (see chapter I, section on methodology).

22 National Criminal Defense Systems Study A @I

not be validated through a reliable Total expenditure for indigent Table 19. States' indigent defense secondary sOUl'ce. Thus, with the ex­ (WIding sources defense, 1982 ception of those five States, State­ level expenditures were verified by Funding highly reliable secondary sources. State State County Both Percent Total 18 22 11 100 Indigent defense expenditures in T01-11 5624650,000 1982 Alabama x Alaska x 90 Arizona x Almost $625 million was spent on Arkansas x indigent defense in the United States California x 80 in 1982. This survey revealed 1982 Colorado x national expenditures to be far Connecticut x Delaware x greater than even the most generous 70 Dist. of Columbia x 5408966,000 adjustments of the 1980 estimate Florida x would have yielded. Total U.S. Georgia x 60 expenditures in 1982 for indigent Hawaii x Idaho x defense services involving cases in Illinois x the Sta1fscourts were almost $625 Indiana x million. County governments Iowa x contributed the largest share: $409 Kansas x Kentucky x 40 million (65%) (figure 3). State contributions made up one-third of Louisiana x Maine x total expenditures: $207 million. 30 Maryland x The remaining 2% came from a com­ Massachusetts x bination of other sources: cities, Michigan x Minnesota x 20 towns, the Federal Government, costs imposed on entry fees in Mississippi x certain States, recoupment, court Missouri x Montana x 10 funds, and private foundation Nebraska x 58299000 support. Nevada x o New Hampshire x State County Other Of the approximately 900 programs New Jersey x New Mexico x x that responded to this survey only 6 NelY York F'gure 3 reported receiving Federal funds in North Carolina x x 1982, totaling only $257,000. This is North Dakota x The second major source of indigent the lowest reported figure in a Ohio defense funds came from State decade and reflects the demise of Oklahoma x the Law Enforcement Assistance Oregon x government. For those 39 States in Pennsylvania x which State funds are provided, Administration (LEAA). While this Rhode Island x program-reported State expenditures figure is not a weighted national South Carolina x were collected from all sample estimate it represents all the largest South Dakota x counties in the country that were the Tennessee x counties and then the appropriate Texas x weights applied to arrive at State­ primary recipients of LEAA funds. Utah x In 1973, a high-water mark for LEAA by-State estimates of State p.xpendi­ Vermont x tures. During the course of the funding of indigent defense services, Virginia x survey secondary State-level data expenditures amounted to almost $10 Washington x million. West Virginia x also were collected on expenditures Wisconsin x and costs from such sources as Wyoming x annual reports or budget requests. Table 19 shows each State's prim'i1Y' These data were made available by indigent defense funding sources. State public defenders, State court In 18 States, 11 of which have state­ for indigent defense are provided administrators, State auditors, and wide public defender programs, funds exclusively through State appropri­ others. Reliable secondary data for ations. Another 22 States continue actual State expenditures were made 18This survey did not attempt to gather to fund their indigent defense system available in 27 States. In another expenditure and caseload data for indigent either exclusively or ~dmarily seven States the only State expendi­ defense services required through the Federal through county funds. In 13 of tures were for separate, State­ courts system. these 22 States the counties provide organized appellate defender pro­ 19 The seven S',ales receiving State funds 100% of indigent defense expendi- grams, which reported their expendi­ exclusively for State appellate defender tures directly to us. Only in five programs are ex.::luded from the State column. Also excluded are a few States where the 20 For purposes of this survey, funds received by States-Utah, Tennessee, California, coun ty- or Sta te-level funding is a minor the District of Columbia from the Federal New York, and Washington-could fraction of the total expenditure in the State. Government are treated as county funds. program-reported State expenditures

National Criminal Drifense Systems Study 23 Indigent defense expenditures and case loads

TIT !! !~" #fAA $ 44 anI!' "rm

turesj in the remaininO' 8 State I~ most States the funding source, funding sources have remained stable contributions are relativ~IY small. In elth~r the State or the county, also is reflected in the total relative Illinois, Indiana, Iowa Michigan provIdes an annual appropriation contributions made by each source Minnesota, Oregon, a~d Washington, for the indigent defense program over the years. In 1980 62% of State funds are appropriated solely resulting from a budget submission, indigent defense funds for the Nation to support a separate State-level bu.dget hearings, and funding negoti­ were provided by counties, 38% by app~llate defender program. In Cali­ atIOns. Thus, most programs are State government, and 1% by forma almost 70% of the Sta te's funded out of general county or municipalities and LEAA.21 dollars are provided to the California general State revenues. A few other S:ate Appellate Defender Program. funding methods, however, should be P~r capita costs Fmally, 11 States provide both State mentioned. and county funds. The variation con­ o In Alabama a fair trial tax fund has State, county, and other sources of ~ained in these 11 States is of some been created to support indigent expenditures have been totaled for Interest. each of the 50 States and the Dis­ o In Kansas and North Dakota the defense services. The revenue from this fund consists of a $7 filing fee trict of Columbia (table 20). Other State provi~es all funds for felony cost informatIOn includes 1980 cen­ representatIOn and the counties for all civil cases in Alabama Courts a $7 tax on all criminal convictions ' sus data for each State, per capita provide all funds for misdemeanor cost, and the ranking of per capita and juvenile representation. and a $10 fee for each civil case in' :vhich there is a jury demand. Orig­ cost by State (table 20). Per capita o In Ohio the State reimburses the costs range from a low of $0.71 in local counties up to 50% of their mally, the civil filing fee was $2. In the year following the increase to $7 Arkansas to $13 in the District of annual expenditures, depending on total revenues in Alabama for indi­ Columbia. The mean for the entire the level of the State appropri­ country is $2.76 and the median ation. Since this method of allo­ gent defense services went up more than fourfold. across States is $1.95. cation began, the State contribution o Similarly, in Louisiana an indigent has fallen below 50% in only 1 year. Regional per capita costs o In Wyoming, by statute, the State defender fund has been created in each judicial district. Costs are provides 85% of the annual cost and Highest per capita costs for indigent the counties 15%. ~mposed by every court of original Jurisdiction in the State at a rate defense are in the West. Examining o In South Carolina the State allo­ per capita indigent defense expendi­ cates $265.53 per 1,000 population, betwee!l $4.50 and $10 per case, dependmg on the majority vote of tures on a regional basis reveals and the counties contribute whatever the judges in that district. significant differences (table 21 and is negotiated with the local program. figure 4). The West far exceeds o In Florida the State provides the o Until January 1, 1983, virtually all costs of indigent defense services in other regions in per capita costs for largest shar~ of expenditures, but indi?"ent defense services, with a per under a FlorIda statute the counties Oregon were the responsibility of the c?unties, except that the State pro­ capIta cost of $5.38. However much are required to pay the cost of of the difference is caused by , assigned counsel in conflict and VIded $20,000 for each circuit court judge in the jurisdiction. As of California's $7.05 per capita ratio. unavailability cases and certain Excluding California, the balance of other expenses, including office January 1, the State assumed all costs of representation. the West region is reduced to $3.36 space, utilities, telephone and per capita. While higher than the custodial services. In FY '1983 for o In New York the counties are required to fund the daily operation other three regions, this is the fir.st time, the State began'to significantly less than $5.38. share In the cost of private assigned of their indigent defense programs. The State provides funds for special counsel. The higher per capita cost in o In Kentucky, by statute, a public purposes in certain counties. For example, in FY 1982, 12 of New California can be accounted for in advocate system has been estab­ several ways. First, salaries in lished. Under this system the public York's 62 counties received State funds for programs such as the Major county governments in California are ~d,,:ocate reviews each plan for Offense Program, State Felony generally higher than virtually any IndIgent defense services at the other State in the country. This is county level. If the plan meets the Program, Special Narcotics Program, Emergency Felony Program, and the reflected in the salaries of chief criteria established by the public public defenders in California. Of advocate the State provides 50% of Major Violent Offense Program. ~he seyen ~ublic defender programs the funds. It was assumed in the Very little change has occurred in m Call forma reporting these data, legislation that the counties would the range in salaries for chief public contribute the other 50%. In prac­ the sources of funding of indigent defense services over the past 5 defenders was $50,000 to $60,000. In tice, however, this is not happen­ these same programs, tile starting ing. Of the 18 sample counties years. In only two States have major responding to this survey, 11 changes occurred in indigent defense reported that the county made no funding. Oregon has shifted totally 21Lefstein, Criminal Defense Services for the contribution in FY 1982. from county to State funding and P.oor. p. 10. Because the 1980 expenditure North Dakota has shifted its felony f~gures wer.e based on limited data, the slight difference In percentage of contributions costs from the counties to State between the States, the counties and other government. That indigent defense ca tegories can be exp iained. '

24 National Cdminal Deftnse Systelns Study Table 20. Total expenditUl'es tor indigent detense by SOUl'ce tor the 50 States

Per Banking County Total 1980 capita of per expendi- Other expend i- popu- cost capita State Primary Appellatea Total tures fundingb tures lationC ($) cost

Total 191,442,990 15,941,429 207,384,419 408,966,008 8,299,424 624,649,851 226,549,000 2.76 Alabama 4,238,266 0 4,238,266 0 0 4,238,266 3,894,000 1.09 42 Alaska 3,525,100 0 3,525,100 0 0 3,525,100 402,000 8.77 2 Arizona 0 0 0 8,613,624 7,615 8,621,239 2,718,000 3.17 11 Arkansas 0 0 0 1,614,030 20,000 1,634,030 2,286,000 0.71 51 California 3,775,000 7,003,000 10,778,000 150,874,178 5,108,916 166,761,094 23,668,000 7.05 3 COlorado 8,468,313 0 8,468,313 0 0 8,468,313 2,890,000 2.93 14 Connecticut 4,524,870 0 4,524,870 0 0 4,524,870 3,108,000 1.46 35 Delaware 1,759,700 0 1,759,700 88,905 0 1,848,605 594,000 3.11 12 Dist. of Columbia 0 0 0 8,291,000 0 8,291,000 638,000 13.00 1 Florida 28,499,973 0 28,499,973 9,680,323 0 38,180,296 9,746,000 3.92 7 Georgia 0 0 0 5,672,712 0 5,672,712 5,463,000 1.04 44 Hawaii 3,500,000 0 3,500,000 0 0 3,500,000 965,000 3.63 9 Idaho 0 0 0 1,833,935 0 1,833,935 944,000 1.94 26 Illinois 0 3,000,000 3,000,000 22,057,917 152,395 25,210,312 11,427,000 2.21 23 Indiana 0 793,286 793,286 4,758,144 0 5,551,430 5,490,000 1.01 45 Iowa 0 267,208 267,208 6,119,848 0 6,387,056 2,914,000 2.19 24 Kansas 2,595,032 0 2,595,032 916,961 0 3,511,993 2,364,000 1.49 34 Kentucky 4,516,700 0 4,516,700 539,052 114,000 5,169,752 3,661,000 1.41 38 Louisiana 0 0 0 5,925,256 87,730 6,012,986 4,206,000 1.43 37 Maine 1,088,653 0 1,088,653 0 0 1,088,653 1,125,000 0.97 47 Maryland 10,270,310 0 10,270,310 0 0 10,270,310 4,217,000 2.44 20 Massachusetts 13,092,198 0 13,092,198 0 0 13,092,198 5,737,000 2.28 22 Michigan 0 1,873,100 1,873,100 21,378,331 150,000 23,401,431 9,262,000 2.53 19 Minnesota 0 851,358 851,358 9,463,006 102,360 10,416,724 4,076,000 2.56 18 Mississippi 0 0 0 2,134,112 0 2,134,112 2,521,000 0.85 49 Missouri 4,408,413 0 4,408,413 0 0 4,408,413 4,917,000 0.90 48 Montana 0 0 0 1,399,785 0 1,399,785 787,000 1.78 29 Nebraska 0 0 0 2,708,986 0 2,708,986 1,570,000 1.73 30 Nevada 189,927 0 189,927 3,578,686 60,876 3,829,489 800,000 4.79 5 New Hampshire 2,096,999 50,000 2,146,999 0 0 2,146,999 921,000 2.33 21 New Jersey 19,681,656 0 19,681,656 0 0 19,681,656 7,365,000 2.67 16 New Mexico 3,981,763 0 3,981,763 0 0 3,981,763 1,303,000 3.06 13 New York 17,595,074 0 17,595,074 58,834,447 0 76,429,521 17,558,000 4.35 6 North Carolina 10,643,213 325,000 10,968,213 0 35,825 11,004,038 5,882,000 1.87 27 North Dakota 571,000 0 571,000 376,633 0 947,633 653,000 1.45 36 Ohio 9,597,422 0 9,597,422 8,498,911 0 18,096,333 10,798,000 1.68 31 Oklahoma 0 240,000 240,000 2,652,820 99,133 2,991,953 3,025,000 0.99 46 Oregon 0 582,000 582,000 12,057,051 0 12,639,051 2,633,000 4.80 4 PennsylVania 0 0 0 21,235,197 100,000 21,335,197 1l,864,000 1.80 28 Rhode Island 1,299,684 0 1,299,684 0 0 1,299,684 947,000 1.37 39 South Carolina 1,251,767 456,477 1,708,244 1,690,109 0 3,398,353 3,122,000 1.09 43 Sou th Dakota 0 0 0 1,352,047 0 1,352,047 691,000 1.96 25 Tennessee 2,054,782 0 2,054,782 1,529,560 148,538 3,732,880 4,591,000 0.81 50 Texas 0 0 0 19,286,780 0 19,286,780 14,229,000 1.36 40 Utah 32,500 0 32,500 1,605,667 161,900 1,800,067 1,461,000 1.23 41 Vermont 1,873,264 0 1,873,264 0 0 1,873,264 511,000 3.67 8 Virginia 8,751,353 0 8,751,353 0 24,958 8,776,311 5,347,000 1.64 32 Washington 227,625 500,000 727,625 12,022,991 1,925,178 14,675,794 4,132,000 3.55 10 West Virginia 2,951,655 0 2,951,655 0 0 2,951,655 1,950,000 1.51 33 Wisconsin 13,350,200 0 13,350,200 0 0 13,350,200 4,706,000 2.84 15 Wyoming 1,030,578 0 1,030,578 175,004 0 1,205,582 470,000 2.57 17 8Punds for appellate wOI·k are listed bPor other States, funds for appellate work COther funding includes: Municipali ties, separately for those States which have are included in primary funding. Federal Government 1980 U.S. Census data. independent appellate associations.

National Criminal Defense Systems Study 25 Indigent defense expenditures and caseloads

Abi¥# :w salary for an entry-level assistant public defender was $20,000 to Table 21. Regional expenditures and per capita costs $23,800 (see Chapter II discussion of Per capita chief public defender salaries). Region and State Total costs Population cost ($)

A second reason for a higher per Northeast 141,472,042 49,136,000 2.88 Connecticut 4,524,870 3,180,000 1.46 capita cost in California is that Maine 1,088,653 1,125,000 0.97 public defenders have been able to Massachusetts 13,092,198 5,737,000 2.28 limit their case load as a result of New Hampshire 2,146,999 921,000 2.33 litiga tion conducted several years New Jersey 19,681,656 7,365,000 2.67 ago. The result is the appointment New York 76,429,521 17,558,000 4.35 Pennsylvania 21,335,197 11,864,000 1.80 of the private bar not only in con­ Rhode Island 1,299,684 947,000 1.37 flict cases but also in a significant Vermont 1,873,264 511,000 3.67 number of additional cases for which North Central 115,342,558 58,868,000 1.96 the public defender reports he or she Illinois 25,210,312 11,427,000 2.21 is not available. This affects per Indiana 5,551,430 5,490,000 1.01 cflpita costs because the average Iowa 6,387,056 2,914,000 2.19 cost per case for the private bar in Kansas 3,511,993 2,364,000 1.49 Michigan 23,401,431 9,262,000 2.53 California is almost universally Minnesota 10,416,724 4,076,000 2.56 higher than that of the public Missouri 4,408,413 4,917,000 0.90 defender program. Nebraska 2,708,986 1,570,000 1.73 North Dakota 947,633 653,000 1.45 Per capita costs in largest counties Ohio 18,Q96,333 10,798,000 1.68 South Dakota 1,352,047 691,000 1.96 Wisconsin 13,350,200 4,706,000 2.84 The 50 largest counties account for almost one-half of the Nation's total South 135,594,039 75,372,000 1.80 Alabama 4,238,266 3,894,000 1.09 expenditures for indigent defense. Arkansas 1,634,030 2,286,000 0.71 Analysis of the 50 largest counties in Delaware 1,848,605 594,000 3.11 the Nation, where 69 million people District of Columbia 8,291,000 638,000 13.00 or approximately one-third (310(,) of Florida 38,180,296 9,746,000 3.92 the popUlation reside, reveals that Georgia 5,672,712 5,463,000 1.04 , Kentucky 5,169,752 3,661,000 1.41 these counties account for 43% of Louisiana 6,012,986 4,206,000 1.43 the Nation's total expenditure for Maryland 10,270,310 4,217,000 2.44 indigent defense. National expendi­ Mississippi 2,134,112 2,521,000 0.85 tures and per capita costs were North Carolina 11,004,038 5,882,000 1.87 contrasted with those of the 50 Oklahoma 2,991,953 3,025,000 0.99 South Carolina 3,398,353 3,122,000 1.09 largest counties (figure 5). Almost Tennessee 3,732,880 4,591,000 0.81 $269 million was spent on indigent Texas 19,286,780 14,229,000 1.36 defense services in 1982 by the 50 Virginia 8,776,311 5,347,000 1.64 largest counties. An examination of West Virginia 2,951,655 1,950,000 1.51 the type of system and source of West 232,241,212 43,173,000 5.38 funds for these 50 counties is of Alaska 3,525,100 402,000 8.77 interest. In 32 counties, public Arizona 8,621,239 2,718,000 3.17 California 166,761,094 23,668,000 7.05 defender programs are the primary Colorado 8,468,313 2,890,000 2.93 source of indigent defense services. Hawaii 3,500,000 965,000 3.63 In another 7 counties, public defend­ Idaho 1,833,935 944,000 1.94 er programs provide a sUbstantial :\lontana 1,399,785 787,000 1.78 !'!evada 3,829,489 800,000 4.79 amount of service, along with assign­ 3.06 ed counsel programs. Six counties New Mexico 3,981,763 1,303,000 Oregon 12,639,051 2,633,000 4.80 provide services exclusively through Utah 1,800,067 1,461,000 1.23 I an assigned counsel system, with five Washington 14,675,794 4,132,000 3.55 of these located in Texas and Michi­ Wyoming 1,205,582 470,000 2.57 I gan. Two counties provide services through contracts with private of the funding is provided by county Per capita spending in the 50 largest attorneys. government. In 11 counties the counties is higher than the Nation. State provides 1000(, of the funding. Per capita spending for the 50 The primary source of funding for In the remaining 12 counties, costs largest counties is substantially the largest 5gfounties is provided by of indigent defense services are high.er than the national per capita the counties. In 27 counties 100% shared by the State and county. cost (figure 5). Overall, the 50 largest counties exceed the national 22In those cases where a city was coterminous treated as county expenditures to maintain per capita spending by 40%-$3.87 to with a county or where a city consisted of more consistency with the data obtained from the $2.76. Overall per capita costs for than one county, municipal expenditures were other county questionnaries. the nine assigned counsel counties is a low $1.93, but this figure may reflect the fact that most of these

26 National Criminal Drjense Systems Study mc'" @Ph m

Regional per capita expenditures Expenditures and per capita costs Per capita indigent defense costs: for indigent defense of indigent defense: 50 largest 50 largest counties by region counties vs. the Nation Dollars Dollars Total expenditures 6 6 Milhons of dollars 700

4

Overall North- North South West United east Central States

FIgure 4 50 North- North South West Per capita costs largest east Central counties are located in Texas and counties Michigan rather than the particular Dollars type of system employed. In looking 4 Figure 6 at the 50 largest counties by region, the cost pattern is similar to that of On a per capita basis indigent de­ the Nation's regional per capita 3 fense spending represents less than costs, with the West the highest and 3% of all justice spending. Per the South the lowest (figure 6). capita indigent defense in 1982 was 2 $2.76, whereas per capita justice Adequacy 0'. ;ndigent defense spending for th2:fame year probably fWlding exceeded $101. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics' most Per capita indigent defense spending up-to-date Sourcebook, public and justice spending are correIa ted. defense reportedly received only Each State was given two rankings: 1.5% of State and local criminal one for per capita indigent defense justice dollars, whereas prosecution Overall 50 services received 5.9%; the judiciary expenditures and another for per United largest capita justice spending (table 22). States counties 13.1 %j corrections 24.7%j and police State per capita spending for indi­ 53.2%. gent defense and for all justice Figure 5 services, as expected, is highly cor­ Indigent defense caseload and cost related (1' = .76). Thus, States Resources allocated to indigent per case devoting substantial resources to defense are low compared to other indigent defense are also likely to justice services. However, drawing More than 88% of the approximately provide substantial resources for conclusions about the adequacy of 900 programs that responded to the justice spending overall. For indigent defense spending based on survey provided the total caseload example, Arkansas, which ranked the above comparison and on the figure. In the early stages of the lowest in per capita indigent defense fact that the Nation's total expend­ data collection effort it became spending, also ranked last in per itures are higher than expected, may obvious that reliable data could not capita justice spending_ Similarly, be misleading. Even in those States be collected for each case type for Alaska ranked second in per capita where both per capita indigent de­ spending and first in per capita fense spending and justice spending 23 That figure, which is the most recent per justice spending; California ranked are high, the resources allocated to capita justice expenditure data reported by the third in indigent defense spending indigent defense relative to other Bureau of Justice Statistics, was based on 1979 information. Undoubtedly with inflation and and fourth in total justice spending. justice services are likely to be other forces serving to raise costs, that figure small. would be far l)igher in 1982.

National Cn'minal DEfense Systems Study 27 Indigent defense expenditures and caseloads

c all programs in the sample. Many Table 22. Ranking of per capita indigent programs reported that they simply and Justice spending do not disaggregate their caseload data by type of case. Others re­ Ranking Ranking of ported that while those data could be Qf per Justice generated, supplying them would capita spending State cost per capita require locating each file in the office and then categorizing the case Alabama 42 44 by examining the case file. Conse­ Alaska 2 1 quently, data were collected by case Arizona 11 5 type wherever available, but efforts Arkansas 51 50 California 3 4 to oollect reliable information on the total number of cases were also Colorado 14 16 Connecticut 35 21 expanded. Of those programs that Delaware 12 7 supplied caseload data, almost one­ Dist. of Columbia 1 N/A half (40%) reported that their num­ Florida 7 15 bers were documented by existing Georgia 44 32 data. To achieve maximum uniform­ Hawaii 9 14 ity across programs, wherever Idaho 26 37 possible, case data reported under Illinois 23 12 the column "other" on question #37 Indiana 45 45 were eliminated. The types of cases Iowa 24 38 reported in this category include Kansas 34 36 Kentucky 38 34 special proceedings, bond hearings, Louisiana 37 19 clemency hearings, interviews and Maine 47 47 advice, and social service activity on Maryland 20 8 behalf of indigent clients and their Massachusetts 22 13 families. Analysis of all program Michigan 19 9 questionnaires disclosed the fact Minnesota 18 25 that a negligible number of cases Mississippi 49 49 (less than seven-tenths of 1%) were Missouri 48 27 recorded as "other." Montana 29 49 Nebraska 30 30 Nevada 5 3 As with expenditure data, during the New Hampshire 21 40 course of the survey an attempt was made to secure reliable secondary New Jersey 16 6 New Mexico 13 18 caseload data at the State level in as New York 6 2 many States as possible. Validated North Carolina 27 28 State-level caseload data were North Dakota 36 46 reported from 19 States and the Ohio 31 26 District of Columi:>ia. The secondary Oklahoma 46 42 data were reported principally by Oregon 4 11 State public defenders and State Pennsylvania 28 22 court administrators. In addition, Rhode Island 39 17 the State of Kansas provided vali­ South Carolina 43 41 dated caseload data in all felony South Dakota 25 43 Tennessee 50 35 cases. Texas 40 39 Utah 41 29 Caseload data were available in Vermont 8 33 three other States from independent Virginia 32 23 studies conducted in the year prior Washington 10 20 to our survey period. In each of West Virginia 33 48 these three cases the statewide Wisconsin 15 24 caseload estimate was consistent Wyoming 17 10 with that reported in the three separate studies. As an overall re­ While the caseload data may not be sult, for almost one-half the States as reliable as the expenditure data, caseloads are reported as validated this survey is the first attempt to by reliable secondary sources. In­ provide such estimates on a State­ formation for the remaining States by-State basis. This constitutes an depends on the total caseload important starting point in beginning reported by the sample programs; to examine comparisons of costs per this was then weighted to provide case across States, regions, and in State-by-State estimates. large counties.

28 National Criminal Dl?fense Systems Study °e, 3· k ; , i& !.tj! ;to # * 1 e i SQ.

Indigent defense case load in 1982 Table 23. Tota11982 caseload Cor States and average cost per case Nationwide, indigent defense case­ load in the State courts totaled an Average estimated 3.2 million in 1982 (sum­ Total Total cost per State expenditure caseload mary of each State's 1982 caseload case ($) Ranking and llverage cost per case, table Total 624,649,851 3,187,424 195.97 23).24 To obtain consistent Alabama 4,238,266 29,265 144.82 35 information from the 900 program Alaska 3,525,100 10,438 337.72 4 respondents, data were requested for Arizona 8,621,239 43,306 199.08 23 Arkansas 1,634,030 14,268 114.52 46 11 categories of cases, including- California 166,761,094 661,466 252.11 12 c Felony Colorado 8,468,313 39,207 215.99 18 Q Misdemeanor Connecticut 4,524,870 42,903 105.47 50 o Capital or life imprisonment Delaware 1,848,605 10,566 174.96 30 o Juvenile (criminal) District of Columbia 8,291,000 19,087 434.38 2 Florida 38,180,296 225,910 o Juvenile (status offense) 169.01 31 Georgia 5,672,712 43,198 131.32 39 o Family matters (such as support Hawaii 3,500,000 6,169 567.35 1 payments) Idaho 1,833,935 15,184 120.78 44 o Appeals Illinois 25,210,312 194,221 129.80 42 o Mental commitment Indiana 5,551,430 42,430 130.84 41 o Parole revocation Iowa 6,387,056 22,593 282.70 7 Kansas 3,511,993 19,433 180.72 27 I') Postconviction relief Kentucky 5,169,752 30,827 167.70 32 o Other (specify). Louisiana 6,012,986 54,134 111.08 49 Maine 1,088,653 9,756 111.59 47 The 1982 average cost per case in Maryland 10,270,310 78,371 131.05 40 the country was $195.97, with Massachusetts 13,092,198 73,909 177.14 29 Hawaii showing the highest cost per Michigan 23,401,431 90,543 258.46 11 Minnesota 10,416,724 46,957 221.84 17 case at $567.35 and Oklahoma the Mississippi 2,134,112 17,316 123.25 43 lowest at $84.74. In the majority of Missouri 4,408,413 31,885 138.26 38 States, the average cost per case Montana 1,399,785 5,253 266.47 9 falls between $100 and $200 (table Nebraska 2,708,986 23,190 116.82 45 24). Nevada 3,829,489 16,858 227.16 15 New Hampshire 2,146,999 6,737 318.69 6 New Jersey 19,681,656 54,395 361.83 3 Average cost per case is highest in New Mexico 3,981,763 16,817 236.77 13 the West. An analysis of regional New York 76,429,521 363,082 210.50 20 caseload and cost per case reveals North Carolina 11,004,038 58,808 187.12 25 the same patterns as the regional North Dakota 947,633 4,598 206.10 21 analysis of per capita costs (table Ohio 18,096,333 94,325 191.85 24 Oklahoma 2,991,953 35,307 84.74 51 25). The average cost per case is Oregon 12,639,051 44,767 282.33 8 highest in the West-$243.31 and Pennsylvania 21,335,197 140,960 151.36 34 lowest in the South-$151.93. In the Rhode Island 1,299,684 5,018 259.00 10 West 10 of 13 States exceed the South Carolina 3,398,353 20,356 166.95 33 national average with only Arizona, South Dakota 1,352,047 6,260 215.98 19 Utah, and Washington falling below. Tennessee 3,732,880 25,987 143.64 36 Texas 19,286,780 136,936 140.85 37 In the South, 15 of 17 States fall Utah 1,800,067 9,954 180.84 26 I below the national average with only Vermont 1,873,264 9,120 205.40 22 the District of Columbia and West Virginia 8,776,311 78,880 111.26 48 Virginia above. Washington 14,675,794 81,447 180.19 28 West Virginia 2,951,655 13,236 223.00 16 Wisconsin 13,350,200 58,162 229.53 14 24Note that this figure is the total number of Wyoming 1,205,582 3,629 332.21 5 cases weighted that were reported by programs in the sample. Some percentage of indigent cases are handled without fee by the private bar An examination of the cost per case and would not be included in the estimates. Table 24. Summary oC average amon~ the 50 largest counties Estimates also do not include cases in which cost per case Cor indigent defense judges desire to make appointments but cannot ($200.45) reveals only a small in­ because no counsel is available. No estimate crease in cost from the national Average Number Percent has been made of the volume of cases in either average of $195.97. However, di­ cost per of of of these two categories, but it would be viding the 50 largest counties into case States States substantial. For a discussion of this problem, census regions provides some sub­ see A Study of Defense Services for Indigent Less than $100 1 2% Criminal Defendants in South Carolina: stantial differences in average cost $100-199 28 55 Analysis and Recommendations (Cambridge, per case. Unlike all regional $200-299 16 31 Mass.: Abt Associates Inc., 1982). analyses presented thus far, where $300-399 4 8 the Wes:t emerges at the high end $400-499 1 2 $500-599 1 2

National Criminal DifellSe Systems Study 29 Indigent defense expenditures and case loads

~'1'e ..... mOA and the South on the low side, Table 25. Regional cnseload and cost per case average cost per case is highest in larger counties in the Northeast Region and State Total costs Cascload Cost per case ($) ($230.88) and lowest in North Central counties (150.97). Northeast 141,472,042 705,880 200.42 Connecticut 4,524,870 42,903 105.47 Maine 1,088,653 9,756 111.59 Incidence of indigent cases Massachusetts 13,092,198 73,909 177.14 New Hampshire 2,146,999 6,737 318.69 To obtain some indication of the New Jersey 19,681,656 54,395 361.83 incidence of indigent cases the New York 76,429,521 363,082 210.50 Pennsylvania 21,335,197 140,960 151.36 number of indigent cases reported Rhode Island 1,299,684 5,018 259.00 per 1,000 population was computed Vermont 1,873,264 9,120 205.40 for all 50 States and the District of North Central 115,342,558 634,597 181.76 Columbia, aiong with a State-by­ Illinois 25,210,312 194,221 129.80 State ranking (table 26). On a Indiana 5,551,430 42,430 130.84 national basis, slightly more than 14 Iowa 6,387,056 22,593 282.70 indigent cases are reported for every Kansas 3,511,993 19,433 180.72 1,000 residents. Incidence is highest Michigan 23,401,431 90,543 258.46 :I1innesota 10,416,724 46,957 221.84 in the District of Columbia, Alaska, :>.1issouri 4,408,413 31,885 138.26 California, Florida, Nevada, and New Nebraska 2,708,986 23,190 116.82 York. States with the lowest rank North Dakota 947,633 4,598 206.10 include Rhode Island, Arkansas, Ohio 18,096,333 94,325 191.85 Sou th Dakota 1,352,047 6,260 213.98 Hawaii, Missouri, and South 13,350,200 58,162 229.53 Carolina. Wisconsin South 135,594,039 892,452 151.93 The incidence of indigent defendants Alabama 4,238,266 29,265 144.82 Arkansas 1,634,030 14,268 114.82 per 1,000 population is substantially Delaware 1,848,605 10,566 174.96 higher among the 50 largest counties District of Columbia 8,291,000 19,087 434.38 (19.79) than in the Nation as a Florida 38,180,296 225,910 169.0 whole. Incidence of indigent Georgia 5,672,712 43,198 131.32 Kentucky 5,169,752 30,827 167.70 defendants per 1,000 population by Louisiana 6,012,986 54,134 111.08 census region shows considerable Maryland 10,270,310 78,371 131.05 variation, from E1 high of 22.00 in the :,lississippi 2,134,112 17,316 123.25 West to lows of 10.78 in the North North Carolina 11,004,038 58,808 187.12 Central region and 11.84 in the South Oklahoma 2,991,953 35,307 84.74 South Carolina 3,398,353 20,356 166.95 (table 27). Intuition suggests that Tennessee 3,732,880 25,987 143.64 the incidence of indigent defendants Texas 19,286,780 136,936 140.85 per 1,000 population may be a func­ Virginia 8,776,311 78,880 111.26 tion of two primary factors: the West Virginia 2,951,655 13,236 223.00 rate of crime and the incidence of West 232,241,212 954,495 243.31 poverty in the area under study. Alaska 3,525,100 10,438 337.72 Furthermore, both high crime rates Arizona 8,621,239 43,306 199.08 California 166,761,094 661,466 252.11 and high incidence of poverty would Colorado 8,468,313 39,207 215.99 be anticipated in metropolitan areas, Hawaii 3,500,000 6,169 567.35 thereby helping to explain the high Idaho 1,833,935 15,184 120.78 rates of indigent defendants in these :'.lontana 1,399,785 5,253 266.47 areas. Nevada 3,829,489 16,858 227.16 New ~Iexico 3,981,763 16,817 236.77 Oregon 12,639,051 44,767 282.33 Utah 1,800,067 9,954 180.84 Wnshin:;ton 14,675,794 81,447 180.19 Wyoming 1,205,582 3,629 332.21

30 National Cn'minai Dl!(ense Systems Study C@; £A @' = if'f =

Table 26. Indigent cases per Table 27. Indigent cases per 1,000 population by census region 1,000 population for States Indigent cases Indigent per 1,000 cases per Region and State Caseload Population population 1,000 State population Rank Northeast 705,880 49,136,000 14.37 Connecticut 42,903 3,108,000 13.80 Alabama 7.52 38 Maine 9,756 1,125,000 8.67 Alaska 25.97 3 Massachusetts 73,909 5,737,000 12.88 Arizona 15.93 14 New Hampshire 6,737 921,000 7.31 Arkansas 6.24 49 New Jersey 54,395 7,365,000 7.39 California 27.95 2 New York 363,082 17,558,000 20.68 Colorado 13.57 18 Pennsylvania 140,960 11,864,000 11.88 Connecticut 13.80 17 Rhode Island 5,018 947,000 5.30 Delaware 17.79 10 Vermont 9,120 511,000 17.85 Dist. of Columbia 29.92 1 North Cen tral 634,597 58,868,000 10.78 Florida 23.18 4 Illinois 194,2n 11,427,000 17.00 Georgia 7.91 34 Indiana 42,430 5,490,000 7.73 Hawaii 6.39 48 Iowa 22,593 2,914,000 7.75 Idaho 16.08 13 Kansas 19,433 2,364,000 8.22 Illinois 17.00 11 Michigan 90,543 9,262,000 9.78 Indiana 7.73 36 Minnesota 46,957 4,076,000 11.52 Missouri 31,885 4,917,000 6.48 Iowa 7.75 35 Nebraska 23,190 1,570,000 14.77 Kansas 8.22 33 North Dakota 4,598 653,000 7.04 Kentucky 8.42 32 Ohio 94,325 10,798,000 8.74 Louisiana 12.87 19 South Dakota 6,260 691,000 9.06 Maine 8.67 31 Wisconsin 58,162 4,706,000 12.36 Maryland 18.58 8 South 892,452 75,372,000 11.84 Massachusetts 12.88 21 Alabama 29,265 3,894,000 7.52 Michigan 9.78 27 Arkansas 14,268 2,286,000 6.24 Minnesota 11.52 25 Delaware 10,566 594,000 17.79 Mississippi 6.87 42 District of Columbia 19,087 638,000 29.92 Missouri 6.48 47 Florida 225,910 9,746,000 23.18 Montana 6.67 45 Georgia 43,198 5,463,000 7.91 Nebraska 14.77 15 Kentucky 30,827 3,661,000 8.42 Nevada 21.07 5 Louisiana 54,134 4,206,000 12.87 New Hampshire 7.31 40 Maryland 78,371 4,217,000 18.58 Mississippi 17,316 2,521,000 6.87 New Jersey 7.39 39 North Carolina 58,808 5,882,000 10.00 New Mexico 12.91 20 Oklahoma 35,307 3,025,000 11.67 New York 20.68 6 South Carolina 20,356 3,122,000 6.52 North Carolina 10.00 26 Tennessee 25,987 4,591,000 5.66 North Dakota 7.04 41 Texas 136,936 14,229,000 9.62 Ohio 8.74 30 Virginia 78,880 5,347,000 14.75 Oklahoma 11.67 24 West Virginia 13,236 1,950,000 6.79 Oregon 17.00 12 West 954,495 43,143,000 22.00 Pennsylvania 11.88 23 Alaska 10,438 402,000 25.97 Rhode island 5.30 51 Arizona 43,306 2,718,000 15.93 South Carolina 6.52 46 California 661,466 23,668,000 27.95 South Dakota 9.06 29 Colorado 39,207 2,890,000 13.57 Tennessee 5.66 50 Hawaii 6,169 965,000 6.39 Texas 9.62 28 Idaho 15,184 944,000 16.08 Utah 6.81 43 Montana 5,253 787,000 6.67 Nevada 16,858 800,000 21.07 Vermont 1'1.85 9 New Mexico 16,817 1,303,000 12.91 Virginia 14.75 16 Oregon 44,767 2,633,000 17.00 Washington 19.71 7 Utah 9,954 1,461,000 6.81 West Virginia 6.79 44 Washington 81,447 4,132,000 19.71 Wisconsin 12.36 22 Wyoming 3,629 470,000 7.72 Wyoming 7.72 37 :rlcan 14.07

National Criminal D~nse Systems Study 31 Indigent defense expenditures and caseloads

1&

To explore these hypotheses, the Table 28. A comparison of States' rankings in factors related to indigent cases correlation between State rankings on indigent cases per 1,000 popula­ Percent of tion was examined on three distinct Indigent population Percent of measures: (1) crime rate, (2) per­ cases per below the population 1,000 Crime poverty in melropo- centage of State population below population rate level litan areas the poverty line (poverty index), and State rank ranking ranking ranking (3) percentage of State population in -_., metropolitan areas (table 28). A Alabama 38 40 3 29 strong positive correlation of 0.52 Alaska 3 9 29 3ij Arizona 14 2 18 19 was found between State ranking for Arkansas 49 44 2 41 indigent cases per 1,000 popula tion California 2 3 27 1 and the crime rate. Thus, indigent Colorado 18 6 37 13 defendant cases per J,DOO is Connecticut 17 15 50 6 associated with the overall rate of Delaware 10 8 25 22 crime in a jurisdiction. District of Columbia 1 MIA 5 NIA Florida 4 4 15 7 A more modest, positive correlation Georgia 34 23 9 30 of 0.32 was found between indigent Hawaii 48 5 40 17 cases per 1,000 population and Idaho 13 41 20 48 Illinois 11 25 28 12 percentage of population in metro­ Indiana 36 31 43 20 politan areas. However, when the Iowa 35 36 38 40 crime rate is controlled this corre­ Kansas 33 26 39 35 lation is reduced to almost zero, Kentucky 32 46 6 36 indicating that crime rate and Louisiana 19 21 4 27 percentage of population in metro­ Maine 31 39 19 44 politan areas are themselves corre­ Maryland 8 12 41 5 lated. Finally, a small negative Massachuset ts 21 14 44 8 correlation of -0.15 was found Michigan 27 13 33 9 between indigent cases per 1,000 Minnesota 25 35 45 26 population and percentage of popu­ Mississippi 42 48 1 45 lation below the poverty level, sug­ Missouri 47 27 23 24 gesting that poverty level alone does :l'lontana 45 33 22 46 I Nebraska 15 42 30 37 not contribute to the incidence of Nevada 5 1 47 10 indigent defendants. Despite the I New Hampshire 40 32 49 34 intuitive sense that indigent cases New Jersey 39 16 46 3 per 1,000 population will be related New :'.lexico 20 18 7 39 to percentage of the population New York 6 11 16 4 living both below the poverty level North Carolina 26 38 13 33 and in metropolitan areas, this North Dakota 41 49 21 43 presumed correlation was not sub­ i Ohio 30 24 34 15 stantiated by the data. When these Oklahoma 24 30 17 32 factors are controlled for the crime Oregon 12 10 31 25 Pennsylvania 23 45 32 11 rate only the crime rate proves to be I Rhodc Island :;1 19 35 2 strongly correlated with State rankings of indigent defendants. South Carolina 46 28 10 31 South Dakota 29 47 8 49 Tennessee :;0 43 11 28 Analysis of indigency rates Texas 28 17 14 16 by case type Utah 43 20 36 18 Varmont 9 22 24 47 Ideally, indigency rates would be Virginia 16 37 26 21 determined not on the basis of Washington 7 7 42 14 \~~st Vi~ginia 44 50 12 42 population, but by comparing each ,ry \\JsconSIn 2~ 34 48 23 State's reported indigent case10ad by Wyoming 37 29 51 50 case type to its total criminal caseload. During the course of the survey, each program was asked to Unfortunately, a number of programs requires counsel in all cases in which estimate the ratio of cases in the were unable to report because they the crime carries a jail sentence, county that involved indigent do not collect data in this manner. while State "B" requires counsel only defendants to the total number of Also the problem was compounded by when a jail sentence is to be im­ criminal cases filed within the the fact that jurisdictions define posed. It is possible that State "A" categories of felony, misdemeanor, felony and misdemeanor in different could have an indigency rate of 50% juvenile, mental commitment, and ways. For example, assume that two or more and State "B" an indigency appeal. StatE;'; have a comparable total mis­ ra te below J 0%. demeanor caseload, but State "A"

32 National Criminal Defense Systems Study "'#Ji ......

Table 29. Comparison of generally Statewide technical assistance, accepted indigency rates and training and other services survey data A brief discussion is Important on Survey the role of a group of organizations Generally responden ts' "ceepted estimates providing technical assistance, train­ Types of indigeney of indigeney ing, and back-up support for indigent cases rates rates defense programs in a number of States throughout the country. Be- Felonies 48% :\lore thai1 40"6 , cause these programs do not provide Misdemeanors 25 40% or less Juvenile 80 More than 60% direct trial assistance, their overall Appeals 90 More than 70% expenditures of slightly more than $2 million were not included in the $625 million previously reported. The A further complicating problem vast majority of funds for these involves the legal definition of program operations come from State felol'lY and misdemeanor. Again, expenditures, although some pro­ for example, one State could define grams charge dues or receive tuition a misdemeanor as any crime that and expense money from their train­ carries a jail sentence of 2112 years ing seminars. Examples of the or less, while another State could important work performed by some define a misdemeanor as a crime of these programs include the that carries a jail sentence of no following: more than 30 days. The indigency (I In Florida, by state statute there is rate for both misdemeanors and a statewide Public Defender Associ­ felonies in these two States would ation. The association's operations vary substantially. in<:Jlude a State cool'dinating office located in the state capital whose Despite these variations, there is major activities include coordination some consistency between generally of activities of the 20 regional public accepted rates for types of cases defender programs, the development and the survey data. Based on on­ of training seminars, and a central site data collection and secondary 1 liaison with the legislative, execu­ analysis conducted over the past 5 /2 tive, and judicial branches. years, generally recognized indi­ <> In Indiana the State Public Defend­ gency rates are as follows: felonies, er Council focuses on the training of 48%; misdemeanors, 25%; juvenile, all indigent defense programs in the 80%; and appeals, 90% (table 29). State, both public defender and pri­ vate bar. The council also publishes The estimates of indigency rates a newsletter and provides technical provided by the survey respondents assistance to county programs. generally SUbstantiate those rates. o In New York, the State Public The majority of programs providing Defender Association is available to estimates of felony indigency rates all county programs, publishes a bi­ reported that 40% or more felony monthly newsletter, and conducts cases involve indigent defendants in regional and statewide training their jurisdictions. Similarly, most programs. counties indicated that the vast majority of juvenile cases (more than In addition to these three Sta tes, 60%) and an even greater proportion similar programs are operating in of appeals (more than 70%) involve California, Illinois, Iowa, North indlgent defendants. On the other Carolina, Pennsylvania, Oregon, and hand, programs were most likely to South Carolina. report that less than 40% of misdemeanors involve indigent defendants.

National Criminal Dtifense Systems Study 33 Chapter IV Variations in case processing and systems changes

5C r

This chapter discusses some features From prior work, it is known that Recoupment of case processing common to all work has recently been done both in systems of indigent defense: how Rhode Island and Wyoming in this Coupled with indigency screening, defendants are determined to be regard. However, neither statewide recoupment is also seen as a means Indigent; whether there are any program has yet developed published of reducing defender costs. Indi­ provisions requiring indigents to guidelines. gency screening is a mechanism for contribute toward the cost of repre­ assessing a defendant's ability to pay sentation, how soon after arrest A great deal of variation exists attorneys' fees. Recoupment is the attorneys receive case assignments, among the criteria developed to requirement that defendants repay and how separate counsel are ap­ date. While all States base their some portion of the cost of defense pointed in felony cases involving determination of defendants' indi­ services according to their abilities. more than one indigent defendant. gency on income and/or liquid assets, Also discussed is the availability they use different definitions for As predicted by the variation in of legal training opportunities in these terms. For example, some indigency screening, definitions of indigent defense programs. Finally, State programs consider gross in­ recoupment and systems for col­ changes occurring in the structure come, while others take into account lecting payments also differ. In and funding of indigent defense pro­ only net income. Some consider some jurisidictions recoupment may grams throughout the country over liquid assets to be only those cash mean only the repayment of attor­ the past 3 years are summarized. assets, which if converted would not neys' fees or it may incorporate jeopardize the defendant's "ability to some element of restitu~ioJ1. Re­ Formal criteria for indigency maintain his (or her) home or em­ coupment systems may also assess determination ployment," while others include the costs in different ways; for example, defendant's home and automobile. as a judgment lien after conviction A strategy repeatedly proposed for Finally, varying cutoff points are or as a condition of probation. coping with increasing caseloads and used. Some States use the Bureau of Finally, the administration of costs of providing indigent defense Labor Statistics' definition of the recoupment systems can be accom­ services is to apply formal indigency poverty level; others factor in the plished through various arrangements criteria, ensuring that only those estimated cost of representation; in terms of which agency or individ­ who are truly indigent receive still others take into account pre­ ual is responsible for establishing sarvices. sumptive evidence of ineligibility, recoupment provisions for individual for example, the defendant has post­ defendants; how recoupment pay­ Most States reported having written ed bail, is not on public assistance, ments are solicited; and to which criteria for indigency determin­ or owns more than one automobile. budget such payments are allocated. ation. Contrary to popular belief, Regardless of the form indigency 'our survey found that the majority of criteria take in any given State, A majority of counties reported States reported having written legal analysts agree that the criteria having recoupment requirements. criteria. Close to one-half of the must not jeopardize the constitu­ Among all counties 7596 reported survey respondents providing primary tional rights afforded defendants that they had a system requiring defense services (331 of 750) indi­ under the sixth and fourteenth indigent defendants to make some cated that they had formal indigency amendments. contribution to attorneys' fees when criteria. Regionally, the availability either a plea of guilty is entered or of formal indigency criteria is most Judges most often make the final a finding of guilty is made at trial. common in counties in the South and indigency determination. The actual Recoupment appears to be used least common in counties in the application of written indigency somewhat more frequently by West. In terms of population catego­ criteria is made most often by judges counties in the West and in larger ries, availability of formal indigency or clerks, although others-including counties of more than 500,000 popu­ criteria does not appear to differ public defenders and court personnel lation. Among types of indigent across small and large counties. or probation officers-are sometimes defense systems recoupment appears responsible for making the final to be most often used in statewide The majority of States in which all determination of indigency. In a few public defender systems. In 10 of counties report having formal indi­ counties indigency screeners are the 14 statewide public defender gency criteria (11 of 15) are those in employed to obtain information on systems all counties reported using which statewide public defender sys­ defendants' financial status. Of the recoupment. tems operate. In only three of the few counties that do employ indi­ States with statewide public defend­ gency screeners, those that have Few counties collected payments ers were formal criteria unavailable public defender programs are most from a substantial number of in all counties: Connecticut, Rhode likely to do so. Furthermore, it is in defendants. To assess whether Island, and Wyoming. In Connecti­ the large Northeast public defender counties actually received recoup­ cut, only one-half of the counties counties that indigency screeners are ment payments, respondents were reported having indigency criteria, most likely to be employed. asked to provide information on the and in Rhode Island and Wyoming no percentage of cases in which some counties reported having formal payment was made by indigent criteria to determine indigency. defendants when defense services

34 National Criminal Difense Systems Study ------~-~----

't ......

Table 30. Incidence oC recoupment Table 31. Speed oC case assignment Table 32. Early representation payments by type oC system Percent of Percent of Entry into case counties Percent of counties cases in which for each type of indigents made Percent Within 1 day 33% system reporting payments of counties 2 days 25 case assignments 3 days 19 Type of system within 24 hours 0% 25% Within 1 week 11 1-10 45 3 weeks 9 Public defender 39% 11-25 13 Assigned counsel 33 More than 25 17 After 3 weeks 3 Contract 12 were provided. While the vast counties reported receiving case Table 33. Circumstances under which majority of counties reported having assignments within 1 day after separate counsel are appointed to recoupment requirements, it appears arrest. If the period of initial codefendants that payments are received in only a attorney contact is expanded to 48 small fraction of cases (table 30). hours, more than one-half the Percent of One-fourth of all counties that counties are included (57%). Circumstances counties reported having a recoupment policy In every instance 34% stated that no payments had been Early representation is most likely to At attorney's request 50 received from indigent defendants. occur in a public defender system At defendant's request 26 Most counties received payments for (table 32). Of counties with public At court's discretion 38 only a small percentage of indigent defenders, 39% reported receiving Never 1 cases: 1 to 10%. case assignments within 24 hours. In Note: Total exceeds 100% because particular, statewide public defend­ separate counsel may be appointed Early representation ers seemed especially likely to pro­ under several circumstances. vide: early representation. Assigned Traditionally, attorneys who provide counsel systems did not lag far be­ firm, the office cannot represent indigent defense services are not hind, with one-third of those both defendants if a conflict exists appointed to represent the defendant counties reporting assignment within between codefendants. Under these until his or her formal arraignment. the first 24 hours after arrest. In some jurisdictions, this time Contract systems, however, were circumstances the court must ap­ point a private member of the bar. period may exceed 30 days or more notably less likely to provide early from the date of arrest. By this representation. Only 12% of contract counties reported receiving As court decisions have restricted time, however, it may be too late to the policy on representation of protect many of the defendant's cases within 24 hours. constitutional rights. For example, codefendants, public defenders have the defendant may have already Appointment of separate counsel begun to make a declaration in a inadvertently incriminated him- or in felony cases involving multiple larger number of cases (see chapter herself by providing statements in defendants I). In fact, analysis of this survey's expenditure information reveals that the absence of counsel. Moreover in 1982 well over $81 million (12% of witnesses. for the defense may be ' While historically the code of pro­ lost between the time of arrest and fessional ethics has prohibited one total expenditures for indigent de­ appointment of counsel. Finally, the attorney from representing co­ fense) were devoted to cases involv­ defendant may well be placed at a defendants when a conflict of ing conflicts and cases in which disadvantage in relation to the pros­ interest has been determined, more public defenders were 4.firvailable to ecutor in terms of the preparation recently the U.S. Supreme Court provide representa tion. of the case. Thus, early representa­ arId other appellate courts have been ThiS survey sought to determine, tion, defined by some as entry by applying a narrower i~erpretation co 1 into a criminal case within of what a conflict is. In effect, more specifically, the circumstances 24 ,rs of arrest, is seen as an the restrictions placed on individual under which separate counsel are ap­ important advance in protecting the attorneys in representing codefend­ pointed for codefendants. Separate rights of indigent defendants. ants have been extended to all attor­ counsel are most likely to be ap­ neys employed by the same office. pointed at the attorney's request Early representation is provided in Because all attorneys employed in a (table 33). Furthermore, there are one-third of all counties. To obtain public defender's office are con­ some important regional differences some indication of the extent to sidered to be members of the same which early representation is 26 The $81 million estimate is conservative because not all counties could provide a provided, survey respondents were 25 On December 8, 1983, in the case of People asked how soon after arrest cases breakdown of expenditures for primary v. Mroczko, Crim. 21159, the California representation and private cOllnsel appointed in are typically assigned. The most Supreme Court announced that separate counsel conflict/unavailability cases. Furthermore, in common answer was, in fact, within mus~ be appointed in each case involving some public defender counties the organization 24 hours (table 31). One-third of all multiple defendants unless an effective waiver did not separately collect cost and case load for is made. public defender staff appointments and private bar conflict and unavailability appointments.

National Oiminal Dejense Systems Study 35 Variations in case processing and systems changes

"'N'ti t ,,,. flEW Em "4'fA

(table 34). Among those counties systems to oversee local programs. Table 34. Appointment of separate appointing separate counsel in every counsel tor codetendants by region o Missouri. Prior to April 1, 1982, instance of codefendants, those in most counties in Missouri provided the NortJieast and West are most Percent of counties indigent representation through an likely to so. This can be accounted appointing separate assigned counsel system. On that for by the concentration of state­ counsel in all cases date the Missouri State legislature wide public defenders in those two Region of codefendants created a State Public Defender regions. Similarly, the largest All counties 34% Commission. The commission was counties with more than 1 million in Northeast 75 charged with ·establishing the Office population are more likely to declare North Central 33 of State Public Defender to be an conflicts in every instance, whereas South 18 independent department to the smaller counties are more likely to West 46 judicial branch of government. The do so only upon request. In North State public defender was then Central counties, separate counsel charged with creating and admini­ for codefendants are most likely to Table 35. Availability of legal training stering a statewide public defender be appointed when requested by COl' indigent deCense attorneys by program type system with the ability to contract attorneys or defendants. In the with members of the private bar, South, it is most often at the court's Percent of where appropriate. Under the act, discretion that separate counsel are Type of program counties individual criminal court judges are appointed. no longer permitted to make ap­ Public defender 8196 Assigned counsel 21 pointments to the private bar. Legal training for attorneys Contract 37 Where conflicts occur, they are providing indigent defense either handled by a public defender in an adjoining region or contracts A compelling need exists for training Changes in methods of providing are awarded to members of the lawye~s who provide indigent defense indigent representation pri,rate bar. services, considering: (1) the start­ It New Hampshire. The indigent ing salaries for assistant public de­ To detect shifts and national trends defense system in New Hampshire fenders and the generally low rates in the systems of providing indigent dates back to the system used in the of compensation for assigned counsel defense, respondents were asked 1970's when required representation and (2) the absence, in most indigent whether the method of providing in New Hampshire was shared be­ defense systems, of adequate support representation to indigent defend­ tween local public defenders and the services and supervisors to help ants in their county had been private bar. During the survey manage substantial caseloads. High­ revised, reformed, or reorganized period of 1981-82, a statewide public ly competitive salaries, which would within the past 3 years. defender was established to serve all attract experienced trial attorneys, of New Hampshire's 10 counties. could minimize the need for critical Extent of reported change Salaried staff attorneys now serve training. Similarly, comprehensive the more populous counties while support services could also offset Almost one-fourth of all programs, private assigned counsel serve the extensive training needs. both those providing primary repre­ small rural counties. In areas served sentation to indigents as well as by the private bar, the State public In most counties slightly more than those handling conflict/unavailability defender administers and monitors one-half the programs (55%) report cases, reported changes. Of the 750 the program. that legal training opportunities are primary programs responding, 183 \? Kansas. The State Board of Indi­ not available to attorneys who repre­ or 24.4% answered this question in gent Defense Services was created sent indigent defendants. Regional­ the affirmative. Of the 148 con­ by the 1982 Kansas legislature re­ ly, however, training opportunities flict/unavailability programs that placing the Boar1 of Supervisors of appear to be better for attorneys in responded to the survey, 41 or 27.7% Panels to Aid Indigent Defendants. the Northeast and West) where also answered this question in the Under the new legislation public statewide public defenders are con­ affirmative. defender offices were opened in centrated. In more than 63% of three jusicial districts during 1982- counties in those areas, training is Several State-level changes occurred 83. In addition the new State board reportedly available. Furthermore, in the delivery of indigent defense was given the responsibility of re­ as the size of the county increases, services from 1980-83 viewing and processing all vouchers the more likely is training to be submitted by private attorneys for available. At least 90% of all Several States made a SUbstantial payment resulting from indigent counties whose population size ex­ statewide system change over the defense appointments. ceeds 500,000 report legal training past 3 years. In two States, Missouri West Virginia. Prior to July 1, opportunities compared to only 40% and New Hampshire, the change 1981, each of West Virginia's 55 for counties smaller than 50,000. involved adopting statewide public counties provided indigent repre­ Overall, training opportunities defender systems. Two others, sentation exclusively through an ad appear to be more frequent in public Kansas and West Virginia, developed hoc assigned counsel system. In defender programs than in any other central administrative organizations some counties there were multiple type of system (table 35). for their State indigent defense

36 National en·millal Defonse Systems Study Ii p.rograms :eflecting either separate fund from $859,656 in 1980-81 to the private bar through either lIsts for different levels of juris­ $4,238,266 in 1981-82. assigned counselor contract pro­ diction or different lists for o Oregon. On January 1, 1983, the grams .. The other approach, based on individual judges in the same court. the State of Oregon shifted from a the belief that public defender By statute on July 1, 1981 the West county-funded system to a State­ systems are less expensive, is just Virginia Legal Services C~uncil was f~nded system. Under the legisla­ the opposite: to increase use of formed. Under the statute a state­ tIon, the State Court Administrator public defenders. The difficulties wide office was established with on behalf of the State has the au­ local officials face in identifying several important functions. One of thority to contract out for indigent the most cost-effective system is the statewide office's first assign­ defense services either to members illustrated by a small Midwestern ments was to develop a set of uni­ of the private bar or to public county of about 80,000 population form guidelines and procedures for defender programs. which experimented with virtuall; several new public defender pro­ all systems. They report that a 4) North Dakota. During the survey grams to be established throughout period the State took over from the public defender provided service the State. Its second mission was counties the responsibility of from 1971 to 1980. This was re­ the development of statewide providing funds for counsel in all placed in 1980 by a contract system standards for the establishment and followed in 1982 by an assigned dist~ict court felony proceedings. monitoring, and administration all ~f Durmg the period of August 1980 counsel system. Today, indigent de­ private bar payments for indigent through May 1981 the State Bar fense services are provided through a defense representation. By the end As:;;ociation of North Dakota coordinated assigned counsel system of the survey period several public conducted a study entitled administered by a court official. defender offices were preparing to ilL ' open. egal Representation for Indi- gents Entitled to Court Appointed As indicated below, more counties Counsel in North Dakota.!! One abandoned assigned counsel systems In one State, Massachusetts, use of recommendation in the report was and ac;lopted public defenders (30 the contract system increased. the creation of a commission to counties) than those that discon­ o Massachusetts. For many years develop uniform standards and tinued public defender systems in Massachusetts has had a statewide guidelines for indigent defense favor of the private bar (8 counties): public defender system called the o Assigned counsel to public Massachusetts Defenders Commit­ representation in North Dakota. Subsequently, the North Dakota defender-28 counties tee. However, because of a lack of o Contract system to public funding for the agency they have L~gB:I Counsel for Indigents Com­ mission was established. To date defender-2 counties limited their work for the most part the commission has addressed a ' o Assigned counsel to contract to felony representation in the system-18 counties variety of issues including recoup­ Superior Court and to appeals. The o Public defender to contract balance of the misdemeanor and ment, contract defense services and standards of indigency. ' system-7 counties juvenile work has traditionally been o Public defender to assigned provided by the private bar through counsel-l county Numerous changes took pla.ce among ad hoc assignment or small county o Contract system to assigned contract defender operations. Dur­ programs providing indigent defense counsel-2 counties. ing the survey period, the lower services at the county level from court work shifted in most counties 1980-1983 Although program changes occurred to a contract with the local county in only a small number of counties, Apart from statewide changes dis­ bar association, which guaranteed all these changes occurred in 27 of the required representation for a fixed cussed in the preceding section, by 37 nonstatewide public defender annual appropriation. far the most frequent response to States. t~is survey question was a descrip­ Changes in funding of indigent tIon of a county change in program Apart from system changes, pro­ defense took place in three States­ type. For example, 58 program grams reported a variety of other Alabama, Oregon, and North Dakota. respondents reported a change in changes, such as increasing the size o Alabama. With the exception of their delivery system at the county of public defender staff, increasing approximately $100,000 appropriated level in the last 3 years. the fee schedule for the private bar annually by the State legislature in introducing various methods of limit­ Containing the costs of indigent Alabama, the entire indigent defense ing fees and expenses for assigned defense is of primary concern in system is funded through a Fair Trial counsel, and imposing new limits on Tax Fund. The fund is created by many jurisdictions. In fact, most costs. the charge of a $7 fee imposed on counties that reported making all civil cases in the circuit court changes did so in an attempt to The final set of changes reported in which a jury is requested. The reduce costs. Two contradictory have to do with the overall enhance­ major change that occurred in Ala­ views exist in the field on how to ment of the quality of indigent ?ontain costs. One approach, which bama during the survey period was defense systems in the county. an increase in the tax from $2 to IS based on the belief that public $7 in all civil cases. The result defender systems are the most was an increase in revenue for the expensive, is to shift to the use of

National en"millal Deflmse Systems Study 37 Variations in case processing and systems changes

..... o Improving assigned counsel systems G Broadening the scope of assigned overalL Several counties developed counsel representation. In one standards for appointment and re­ county assigned counsel are now moval of members of the private bar permitted to represent juveniles in representing indigents; especially status offenses and care and pro­ in death penalty cases. Another tection proceedings. Another county county developed standards regard­ paid private attorneys for handling ing quality of representation pro­ juvenile cases for the first time. vided by contractors. Yet another established a panel of G Improving indigency screening and private attorneys to represent indi­ recoupment. Several counties deve­ gents in mental commitment cases. loped comprehensive guidelines on e Monitoring costs. One co un ty indigency determination to ensure established a committee to review fairness and uniformity, while an­ assigned counsel vouchers that had other formed a committee to deve­ been reduced by local judgps. lop guidelines for recoupment in cases involving the private bar. o Providing earlier representation. One county reported appointing private attorneys at first appearance rather than at formal arraignment 2 weeks later. In another county, attorneys are appointed 2 weeks prior to trial, rather than the day before trial.

38 National Cn"minal Defense Systems Study Technical appendix

WW h.;t'

Sampling plan construction (1,519,932) was divided by the counties in the geographic sequential remaining number of desired sample order but less than or equal to the To construct the sample, the counties (5), yielding a new sampling cumulative sum, including the desig­ counties in each State were first interval (303,986). This new sam­ nated county). Frederick County listed in a geographically determined pling interval was again checked would have been the next county sequential order (see figure 7 for against the list of counties, and chosen for the sample, because Maryland State sa.mple). The sam­ one more county-Anne Arundel­ 200,132 <243,708 < 334,395 (see pling interval for each State was was also included in the sample with table 36). The sample was com­ then determined by dividing the total certainty. Subtracting Anne pleted adding the sampling interval population of the State by the num­ Arundel's population from the total to the random number and selecting ber of counties to be sampled. In the and recomputing another new sam­ additional counties in this same case of Maryland the total popula­ pling interval (1,149,157 - 4 = fashion. tion is 4,216,446. Dividing this 287,289) yields no additional figure by nine (the intended number certainty counties, because none 243,708 (random number) of sample counties in Maryland) that remain meet or exceed that 287,289 (sampling interval) yields a sampling interval of level of population. 530,997 Howard County 468,444. Four counties in Maryland 287,289 have populations larger than this The remaining noncertainty sample 818,286 Harford County sampling interval-Montgomery, counties were then chosen by sam­ 287,289 Prince Georges, and Baltimore pling with probability proportional to 1,105,575 Wicomico County counties, and the city of Baltimore size. First, a random number was (table 36). These large counties chosen between 1 and the sampling until the required number of sample were thus included in the sample interval (287,289 in the case of the counties was obtained. with certainty. Maryland example). Suppose the random number drawn was 243,708: In response to the first question on After subtracting the populations of A county would have been chosen if the survey a number of respondents these certain semple counties the this selection number fell into its indicated that they considered sampling interval was recomputed sequence of numbers (e .g., if the themselves to provide representation for the remaining counties. Thus, number selected was greater than under more than one system type. the new total population figure the cumulative sum of all previous To determine the pattern of these

Maryland counties numbered for purposes of sampling

Figure 7

Natiollal Criminal Difense Systems Study 39 Technical appendix

.... multiple responses project staff Table 36. Selection oC Maryland counties with probability proportionate to size examined all valid responses from each of the 718 sample counties. On County County poplllation Cumulative* that basis it was determined that a completed questionnaire had been Garrett 26,498 26,498 Allegany 80,548 107,046 received from at least one primary Washington 113,086 220,132 program (the one providing basic Frederick 114,263 334,395 representation in the jurisdiction) for Montgomery 579,053 696 of the 718 counties or 96.9% of Prince Georges 665,071 the sample counties. All primary Charles 72,751 407,146 St. Marys 59,895 467,041 questionnaires were then merged for Calvert 34,638 501,679 any of the sample counties where Anne Arundel 370,775 multiple responses were received. Howard 118,572 620,251 For example, if there were two Carroll 96,356 716,607 primary program qUestionnaires Baltimore County 665,615 Baltimore City 786,775 completed and one checked off the Harford 145,930 862,537 public defender system and the other Cecil 66,430 922,967 a contract system the county was Kent 16,695 939,662 recorded as a public defender I Queen Annes 25,508 965,170 contract program. Caroline 23,143 988,313 Talbot 25,604 1,013,917 Dorchester 30,623 1,044,540 In the process of analyzing the Wicomico 64,540 1,109,080 primary programs that reported two Somerset 19,188 1,128,268 or more program type responses, it Worcester 30,889 1,159,157 was determined that most of them *Cumulative popUlation of noncertainty llousin Maryland, Advance Report occurred in counties with a primary counties. PHC80-V-22), U.S. Bureau of the Census, public defender program. These Source: 1980 Census of PO!2ulation and 1981. programs, as previously noted, are responsible for total representation in the county. The majority of work types of programs within each State. Because the sample design >POPi = all nonself-representing is performed by the public defender counties in a State staff with supplemental represen­ was not self-weighting, nonresponse­ tation provided through private adjusted sampling weights were For the n' certainty counties in a computed as the reciprocal of the assigned counsel and administered State the sampling weight equals: by the public defender program. Of probability of selection of each the 13 counties recorded in the sample county. Let: m' "other" column, 12 were public IT defender systems with both an M = number of counties in a assigned counsel and contract State When program data were obtained component. m = number of counties for all certainty counties in a State, sampled in a State rn = n' and the sampling weight The next step was to provide an m' = number of certainty equals one. estimate for indigent defense counties sampled in a systems in each of the 50 States and State For the n" nonself-representing the District of Columbia. Several mn = number of nons elf- sample counties in a Sta te, the steps were taken to arrive at these representing counties sampling weight equals: estimates. First, the multiple pro­ sampled in a State gram responses for each county were n = number of sample collapsed into one. This was done by counties for which assuming that all counties reporting program data were at least one public defender response obtained would be designated as a public de­ n' = number of certainty n x POPi fender county. The one law school sample counties for clinical program was designated as which program data In computing the sampling weights an assigned counsel program. The were obtained for the nonself-representing counties assigned counsel/contract programs n" = number of nonself- in a State, counties of very small were designated assigned counsel. representing sample population size could carry a very The programs identified as "other" counties for which large weight. To avoid the deleteri­ were designated public defender program data were ous effects that unequal weights can programs. obtained have on sampling variances, all sam­ POPi == the total population size pling weights greater than or equal The next step was to develop of i-th nonself­ to 20.0 were truncated to 19.9, the weighted estimates for these three representing counties in largest allowable weight. a State

40 National Cn"minal Drjense Systems StudJ' Appendix A County questionnaire

M

The 1982 National Survey 1. How much money did the county SUbtotal: of Criminal Defense expend (i.e., total operating $,____ ---:.00 22-29/ County Questionnaire expenditures) for the provision of defense services to indigents in the Contract Attorney programs (under Abt Associates Inc. last fiscal year? this system, contracts with Individ­ 55 Wheeler Street ual attorney(s), bar association(s), or Cambridge, Massachusetts 02148 $___ -'.00 6-13/ private law firm(s) are used to provide representation in required Please specify the months and year cases in the jurisdiction): for which your answer is applicable: Instructions for completing this Program names: questionnaire: From: .,--_;--__ to $ .00 30-37/ 1. The label at the bottom of this (month) (year) page contains the name of this 14-17/ $ .00 38-45/ county. We have identified your (month) (year) 18-21/ county as funding one or more $ .00 46-53/ indigent criminal defense programs 2. Of this expended amount, how (public defender, assigned counsel, much was spent for each of the $ .00 54-61/ contract system, or law school indigent criminal defense programs clinical programs). If this county in the county? (IF NONE, ENTER Subtotal: does not provide partial or total "0"; IF PROGRAM TYPE DOES NOT $ .00 62-69/ funding-for any indigent criminal EXIST, ENTER "NA".) defense programs, please contact Law School Clinical programs (under Abt Associates Inc. at the designated Public Defender programs (under this this system, law school students and telephone number given below. system, a salaried staff of full-time faculty from a law clinic provide or part-time attorneys render indigent defense services): 2. This brief questionnaire contains defense services through a public or three questions. Please answer each priva te nonprofit organization): Program names: question by printing the requested information in the space provided. Program names: $,____ ---:.00 70-77/

3. In Question 2, you will be asked to $ .00 22-29/ $ .00 6-13/ provide expenditure information for each indigent criminal defense $- .00 30-37/ $ .aO 14-21/ program funded by this county. $ .00 38-45/ $ .00 22-29/ 4. If you have any questions or need assistance in completing the ques­ $ .00 46-53/ Subtotal: tionnaire, please contact Cheryl $ .00 30-37/ Vernon or Lois Olinger, Survey Subtotal: Directors for this Bureau of Justice $ .00 54-61/ Statistics survey, at this toll-free TOTAL SHOULD EQUAL ANSWER number: 1-800-343-3019. Assigned Counsel programs (under IN QUESTION 1 this system, a list is developed of private bar members willing to 5. Please mail the completed Total: accept indigent defense cases on a $______.00 38-45/ questionnaire within 20 days in judge-by-judge or court-by-court the preaddressed, prepaid enve­ basis. This system mayor may not 3. How much money did the county lope provided. While you are not have an administrative component required to respond, your coopera­ expend (i.e., total operating governing the appointment and expenditures) for the provision of tion is appreciated to make this processing cases by the private bar): first national indigent criminal defense services to indigents in the four fiscal years prior to the last defense survey comprehensive, Program names: adequate, and timely. Your fiscal year reported in Question 1 ? (PLEASE ENTER MOST RECENT ON individual responses will be known $ .00 62-69/ only to Abt Associates and will FIRST LINE BELOW AND WORK BACKWARDS.) remain confidential. $ .00 7a-77/ $ .00 6-13/

$ .00 14-21/

National Criminal Deftnse Systems Study 41 ------

Please specify the months and year The 1982 National Survey 1. What type of indigent criminal for which your answer is applicable: of Criminal Defense defense program is this? (CIRCLE Program Questionnaire ALL THAT APPLY.) Fiscal year prior to last fiscal year: A public defender progrt\HI. (under $ . 00 46-53/ Abt Associates Inc . this system, a salaried staff of 55 Wheeler Street full-time or part-time attorneys From: Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138 render defense services through a to public or private nonprofit (month) (year) 54-57/ organization), 1 6/

(month) (year) 58-61/ Instructions for completing this An assigned counsel program (this questionnaire: system is characterized by the appointment from a list of private $ .00 62-69/ 1. The label at the bottom of this bar members who accept cases on a page contains the name of this judge-by-judge or court-by-court From: indigent criminal defense program. basis), 2 7/ to It also lists the name of the study {month~ {year~ 70-73/ county'. We have identified your A coordinated assigned counsel program as serving this county. program ~this system is similar to {month) {year~ 74-77/ When a question refers to "the the assigned counsel system except county" you should answer only for that it has an administered com­ the county on the label. If this ponent and a set of rules and guide­ $ .00 6-13/ indigent criminal defense program lines governing the appointment and does not serve some or all of the processing of cases handled by the From: county, please contact Abt private bar), 3 8/ to Associates Inc. at the designated {month) ~year) 14-17/ telephone numbel' given below. A program that uses contracts with individual attorney(s), bar (month) (year) 18-21/ 2. Please answer each question in association(s), or private law sequence by circling the appropriate firm(s) to provide representation number or code and/or by printing in required cases in the juris- $ .00 22-29/ the requested infOl'mation in the diction, 4 9/ space provided. In some cases you From: will be requested to skip certain A law school clinical program to questions based on your response. (under this system, law school (month) (year) 30-33/ For some questions you will be asked students and faculty from a law to circle all responses that apply. clinic provide indigent defense (month) (year) 34-37/ services), 5 10/ 3. Based on your answer to Question 1, you will be instructed on page 43 2. If any indigent criminal de- to answer Parts A, B, and/or C of fense programs other than this this questionnaire. Please carefully program serve the county, please follow these instructions. All list them by name and address respondents should completePart D below. (If yours is a public de­ of this questionnaire which begins on fender program, please also include page 45. those programs where you have de­ clared a conflict or are otherwise 4. If you do not know the answer to a unavailab Ie.) question, write "DK" for don't know. CIRCLE TYPE OF PROGRAM 5. If you have any questions or need assistance in completing the ques­ Primary Conflict Unavailability tionnaire, please contact Cheryl 1. Vernon or Lois Olinger, Survey Directors for this Bureau of Justice Statistics survey, at this toll-free number: 1-800-343-3019. Primary Conflict Unavailability 6. Please mail the completed ques­ 2. tionnarie within 20 days in the preaddressed, prepaid envelope pro­ vided. While you are not required to respond, your cooperation is appreciated to make this first Primary Conflict Unavailability national indigent criminal defense 3. survey comprehensive, adequate, and timely. Your individual responses will be known only to the research team and will remain confidential.

42 National Cnininal Defense Systems Study INSTRUCTIONS Part of county govern­ 9. Of the lawyers who receiVed ment 04 appointments to represent indigent IF YOU CIRCLED "1" (PUBLIC defendants as part of this program in DEFENDER PROGRAM) IN An independent non­ 1981, what was the minimum, the QUESTION 1, COMPLETE PART A. profit organization 05 maximum, and the average number of cases per lawyer? other (SPECIFY): IF YOU CIRCLED "2" (ASSIGNED ______06 Minimum ______COUNSEL PROGRAM) OR "3" 61-63/ (COORDINATED ASSIGNED Maximum ______64-66/ COUNSEL PROGRAM) IN 6. Please indicate the annual salary, Average ______67-69/ QUESTION 1, COMPLETE PART B. and full-time or part-time sta tus of the following positions in the county 10. Did 5% or less of these lawyers IF YOU CIRCLED "4" (PROGRAMS (CIRCLE ONE). represent 25% or more of the indi­ THAT USE CONTRACTS) IN gent defendants as part of this QUESTION 1, COMPLETE PART C. Full- Part- program in 1981 ? time time IF YOU CIRCLED "5" (LAW Annual posi- posi- Yes 1 70/ SCHOOL CLINICAL PROGRAM) IN Position salary tion tion No 2 71-80/ QUESTION 1, SKIP TO PART D. Chief 11. Who appoints private attorneys IF YOU CIRCLED MORE THAN Prosecutor: $ 1 2 35/ to provide indigent defense services ONE RESPONSE IN QUESTION 1 30-34/ in this program? (CIRCLE ALL (e.g., "1" and "2"), COMPLETE THAT APPLY.) EACH INDICATED PART. Chief Public A judge 1 6/ ALL RESPONDENTS SHOULD Defender: $__ 1 2 41/ COMPLETE PART D 36-40/ A clerk or other admini- strative personnel of the PART A: PUBLIC DEFENDER Lowest salaried court 2 7/ PROGRAMS attorney in Public Defender's An administrator responsible ANSWER PART A IF YOU CIRCLED office $ 1 2 47/ for administering the assign- "I" IN QUESTION 1. 42-46/ ment of attorneys to indigent defendants 3 8/ 3. How many full-time and part­ Highest salaried time public defender lawyers were attorney in Public A public defender 4 9/ employed by this program in 1981? Defender's office How many are employed currently? (other than Public ______Other (SPECIFY): 5 (IF NONE, ENTER 0.) Defender) $ 1 2 53/ 10/ 48-52/ Full-time: 12. Does this program have a list of 1981 Currently eligible and/or willing attorneys to be assigned to indigent defendants? ___-:11-14/ 15-18/ PART B: ASSIGNED COUNSEL PROGRAMS Yes 1 11/ Part-time: No (SKIP TO Q. 16) 2 1981 CUrrently ANSWER PART B IF YOU CIRCLED ___-'19-22/ 23-26/ "2" OR "3" IN QUESTION 1. 13. How does a lawyer become included on this list? (CIRCLE ALL 4. Is the Chief Public Defender of 7. How many active private lawyers THAT APPLY.) this program employed full-time or were there in 1981 in the geographic part-time? (CIRCLE ONE) jurisdictions served by this pro­ All lawyers are gram? (IF PROGRAM SERVES THE included 1 12/ Full-time 1 ENTIRE STATE, PLEASE ANSWER Part-time 2 27/ ONLY FOR THE COUNTY IDENTI­ Affirmatively volunteer 2 13/ FIED ON THE COVER PAGE.) 5. Is this public defender program 54-47/ Volunteer and be deter­ (CIRCLE ONE. PLEASE BASE mined as qualified by admin- YOUR RESPONSE ON THE 8. How many of these lawyers istering personnel 3 14/ ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE, received appointments to represent NOT THE FUNDING SOURCE.): indigent defendants as part of this Volunteer and participate program in 1981 ? in some continuing legal Part of the judicial education or seminars each branch 01 28-29/ 58-60/ year 4 15/

Part of the State executive Other (SPECIFY): ______5 16/ branch 02

An independent agency of the State government 03

National Criminal Defonse Systems Study 43 14. Are there formal procedures to Flat fee: PART C: CONTRACT ATTORNEY remove lawyers from this list? $____ .-:.00 30-31/ PROGRAMS

Yes 1 17/ Other fee: ANSWER PART C IF YOU CIRCLED No 2 $_____ •. 00 32-33/ "4" IN QUESTION 1.

15. Are lawyers on the list cate­ 19. What is the maximum total fee 24. To how many of the following gorized by area of specialization? for a felony case allowed a-n­ groups were contracts awarded in attorney? 1981 by this program to provide Yes 1 18/ representation to indigent criminal No 2 $ .00 34-37/ defendants? (IF NONE, ENTER "0".) N~o-m-a-xl=-'m-u-m---' 1 38/ 16. In 1981, were lawyers in this Individual sole practitioners program required to represent indi­ 20. When assigned to represent 54-55/ gent defendants without compensa­ indigent defendants in misdemeanor tion? (CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY.) cases, how are attorneys paid? A law firm or a group of (CIRCLE ONE) private attorneys joined In every case involving an solely to provide indigent indigent defendant Misdemeanor cases not criminal representation (SKIP TO Q. 23) 1 19/ represented under the contract (SKIP TO Q. 23) o 39/ 56-57/ In more than one-half of the cases 2 20/ A separate out-of-court Bar association and in-court hourly 58-59/ In about one-half of the fee 1 cases 3 21/ Nonprofit organization A fee based on type of 60-61/ In less than one-half of appearance the cases 4 22/ (SKIP TO Q. 23) 2 Other (SPECIFY): 62-63/ When the public funds appro­ A flat fee for appearance 64/ priated for representation (SKIP TO Q. 23) 3 of indigents ran out 5 23/ 25. What governmental unit, agency, A flat fee for the or individual is primarily responsible In no cases 6 24/ case 4 for awarding contracts to provide representation to indigent criminal 17. When assigned to represent Other type of fee defendants? (CIRCLE ONE) indigent defendants in felony (SPECIFY): cases, how are attorneys paid? 5 Judge 0165-66/ (CIRCLE ONE) 21. What are the out-of-court and County 02 A separate out-of-court in-court hourly fees, flat fee, or and in-court hourly other fee paid to attorneys in City or town 03 ~e 1 25/ misdemeanor cases? Public defender 04 A fee based on type of Out-of-court fee: $ .00 per hour 40-41/ appearance Bar association 05 T (SKIP TO Q. 20) 2 In-court fee: State 06 A flat fee for appearance $ .00 per hour 42-43/ (SKIP TO Q. 20) 3 Other (SPECIFY): Flat fee: 07 A flat fee for the case 4 $ .00 44-45/ 26. Are bids solicited before a Other type of fee (SPECIFY): Other fee: contract is awarded (i.e., are 5 $ .00 46-47/ contracts competitively bid)?

18. What are the out-of-court and 22. What is the maximum total fee Yes 1 67/ in-court hourly fees, flat fee, or for a misdemeanor case allowed an No 2 other fee paid to attorneys in felony attorney? cases? 27. What types of contracts are $ .00 48-51/ awarded? (CIRCLE ALL THAT Out-of-court fee: No maximum 1 52/ APPLY.) $ .00 per hour 26-27/ 23. Does this program have a person Fixed price (i.e., representation other than a judge or clerk In-~ourt fee: is provided in a specified number $ .00 per hour 28-29/ responsible for administering the and type of cases for a fixed program? amount) 1 68/ Yes 1 53/ No 2

44 National Criminal Defense Systems Study Cost plus fixed fee (i.e., PART D: GENERAL PROGRAM A judge makes determination representation is provided at CHARACTERISTICS of indigency from the an estimated cost per case bench 3 only until the total contract ALL RESPONDENTS PLEASE price is reached) 2 69/ COMPLETE PART D. Court personnel make determination 4 Block Grant (j.e., representation 31. What is the geographic juris­ is required for all cases in the diction served by this program? Independent screeners jurisdiction regardless of the volume) (CIRCLE ONE) make determination 5 3 70/FR Part of the county (e.g., a Other (SPECIFY): Other type (SPECIFY): city or town) 1 15/ 6

4 71/ The entire county 2 34. Are there formal (written) 72/ criteria used in the indigency 73/ Multicounty or judicial determination process? district that includes part 28. Are contracts monitored by an of the county 3 Yes 1 28/ office or individual independent from No 2 the contracting firm or lawyer? Entire State 4 35. Please indica te the percentage Yes 1 74/ Other (SPECIFY): of each of the following types of No (SKIP TO Q. 30) 2 5 cases in the entire county in 1982 tha t involved indigent defendants. 29. For which of the following 32. In which types of cases are (CIRCLE ONE RESPONSE FOR functions is the monitor of the counsel appointed when a defendant EACH TYPE OF CASE.) contract responsible? (CIRCLE cannot afford to hire a private ALL THAT APPLY.) attorney in the geographic juris­ Percentage diction served by this program? of cases in county T:i[!e of cases Quality of (CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY.) involving Mental represen ta tion 1 75/ indigent Fel- Misde- Ju- commit- Ap- Felony 1 16/ defendants ony meanor venile ment peal 2 76/ Review of budgets 0-10% 01 01 01 01 01 Misdemeanor 2 17/ 11-30% 02 02 02 02 02 Approval of vouchers 3 77/ 31-40% 03 03 03 03 03 Capital or life 41-50% 04 04 04 04 04 51-60% 05 05 05 05 05 Client satisfaction 4 78/ imprisonment 3 18/ 61-70% 06 06 06 06 06 71-90% 07 07 07 07 07 Other (SPECIFY): Juvenile (criminal) 4 19/ 91-100% 08 08 08 08 08 5 79/ 29-30/32-33/ 35-36/ 38-39/ 41-42/ Juvenile (status 80/BK CIRCLE WHETHER offense) 5 20/ YOUR ANSWER IS CONTRACT ADMINISTRATORS Family matters (support Estimated SHOULD ANSWER QUESTION 30 payments, etc.) 1 21/ Documented by AND CASELOAD QUESTIONS 1N existing data 2 2 2 2 PART D FOR THE ENTIRE Appeals 2 22/ 31/ 34/ 37/ 40/ 43/ CONTRACT PROGRAM IN THE COUNTY IDENTIFIED ON THE Mental commitment 3 23/ 36. In which of the following types COVER PAGE. CONTRACT of cases does this program represent RECIPIENTS SHOULD ANSWER Parole revocation 4 24/ indigents? (CIRCLE ALL THAT QUESTION 30 AND CASELOAD APPLY.) QUESTIONS IN PART D ONLY FOR Postconviction relief 5 25/ THEIR ORGANIZATION. Felony 1 44/ Other (SPECIFY): 30. Of attorneys who received Misdemeanor 2 45/ indigent defendant cases under 6 26/ contract in 1981, what was the Capital or minimum, the maximum, and the 33. In the geographic jurisdiction life imprisonment 3 46/ average number of cases per served by this program, who is attorney? responsible for making the final Juvenile (criminal) 4 47/ determination of whether a defend­ Minimum ______6-8/ ant is indigent? (CIRCLE ONE) Juvenile (status offense) 5 48/ Maximum ______9-11/ Public defender makes the deter m ina tion 1 Family matters (support Average ______12-14/ payments, etc.) 1 49/ Any defendant requesting free representation is Appeals 2 50/ g~enit 2 Mental commitment 3 51/

National Criminal Defense Systems Study 45 Parole revocation 4 52/ One or more charges, allegations, When requested by or proceedings within a specific defendants 3 33/ Postconviction relief 5 53/ case category (felony, juvenile, appeal, misdemeanor, etc.), arising At the discretion of Other (SPECIFY): out of one event or a group of the court 4 34/ related contemporaneous events, 6 54/ brought contemporaneously against Never (SKIP to Q. 43) 5 35/ one client 03 37. How many of each of the 42. In 1981, in what percent of the following types of cases involving As immediately above, but a misde­ felony cases involving more than one indigent defendants did this pr0B'ram meanor that is charged along with a indigent defendant was separate receive in total in 1982? (lFN NE, related felony is considered part of counsel appointed for each co­ ENTER "0." READ LIST.) the felony case 04 defendant? (CIRCLE ONE)

Number One or more charges, allegations, 1-5% 1 36/ Type of or proceedings that have the same of cases court docket number 05 6-20% 2 case received One or more charges, allegations, 21-50% 3 Felony 55-58/ or proceedings with the same prosecutor case number 06 51-75% 4 Misdemeanor 59-62/ Any project, activity, or record 76-99% 5 Capital or life that requires creation of a new imprisonment 63-66/ file jacket 07 100% 6

Juvenile 39. Which of the following staff 43. How soon after arrest is a case (criminal) 67-70/ does this program employ? (CIRCLE typically assigned to this program? ONE ANSWER FOR EACH.) If (CIRCLE ONE) Juvenile employed, how many are full-time (sta tus offense) 71-74/ and part-time? 1m media tely after arrest 0137-38/ Family matters Full­ Part­ Yes No time time (support payments, Within 24 hours after etc.) 75-78/ Invesllga tor 34/ 35-36/ 37-38/ Social worker 39/ --40-41/ --42-43/ arrest 02 Paralegal 44/ --45-46/ --47-48/ Appeals 6-9/ Law student 49/ 50-51/ 52-53/ Administrative Within 48 hours after assistant 54/ 55-56/ 57-58/ arrest 03 Mental Secretary 59/ 60-61/ 62-63/ indigent commitment 10-13/ screener 64/ 65-G6/ 67-681 Within 72 hours after Fiscal officer 691 70-711 72-731 arrest 04 Training Parole revocation 14-17/ director 2 74/ __75-76/ __77-78/ Other Within 7 days after (SPECIFY); 7-8/ 9-10/ Post con­ 61 arrest 05 viction relief 18-21/ 40. Are the following services Within 21 days after Other (SPECIFY) 22-25/ available in this program? What is arrest 06 TOTAL 26-30/ the maximum allowable expense for each service that is available? More than 21 days after arrest 07 CIRCLE WHETHER \laximum YOUR ANSWER IS: allowable Yes No expense 44. When a case is received by this program, is it: (CIRCLE ONE) Estimated 1 31/ Investigators 2 III $ .00 12-15/ Expert witnesses 2 16/ $---.00 17-20/ Transcripts 2 211 $---.00 22-251 Assigned to an attorney Documented by Social services 2 26: $ .00 27-301 who handles the case existing data 2 through trial (vertical 41. In felony cases involving mor'e representation) 0139-40/ 38. Which of the following best than one indigent defendant, are describes how this program defines a separate cou':)sel appointed for each Assigned to different case? (CIRCLE ONE) defendant'? (CIRCLE ALL THAT attorneys at various stages APPLY.) of the case (horizontal One single charge against one or representation) 02 more defendants 01 32-33/ In every instance of codefendant 1 31/ Another procedure One or more charges, alle­ (SPECIF Y): 03 ga lions, or proceedings When the initially appointed that normally would be attorney requests separation handled at a single trial of defendants 2 32/ or hearing 02

46 National Oiminal Defense Systems Study 45. In this program, are legal Other 52. How many felony cases involving training opportunities available to (SPECIFY) $__ -,.00 46-53/ indigent defendants in this program attorneys who represent indigent went to trial in 1981? criminal defendants? TOTAL $__ -,.00 54-61/ 61-63/ Yes 1 41/ No 2 TOTAL SHOULD EQUAL ANSWER 53. What percentage of these cases IN Q. 47 resulted in a defendant being sen­ If "yes," please describe: tenced to jail or prison? 49. How much money did this pro­ 42-43/ gram expend (i.e., total operating ______---:% 64-66/ 44-45/ expenditures) to provide defense 46-47/ services to indigents in the four fiscal years prior to the last fiscal CIRCLE WHETHER YOUR year reported in Question 47? ANSWERS TO Q. 50 - Q. 53 ARE: (PLEASE ENTER MOST RECENT ON 46. Has the method of providing FIRST LINE BELOW AND WORK Estimated 1 67/ representation to indigent defend­ BACKWARDS.) Documented by ants in the county been revised, existing data 2 reformed, or reorganized within the Please specify the months and year past 3 years? for which your answer is applicable: 54. Are there any provisions in your court system that require an indigent Yes 1 48/ Fiscal year prior to last fiscal year: defendant to pay costs or attorney No 2 fees as a result of a guilty plea or $______.00 62-69/ a finding of guilt at trial (recoup­ If "yes, II please describe~ ment)? From: ______49-50/ to Yes 1 68/ 51-52/ (month) "1'[y-e-ar"""")-- 70-73/ No 2 53-54/ (month) (year) 74-77/ 55. In what percentage of cases in 1981 was some payment made by the indigent defendant after defense 47. How much money did this pro­ $____ ----:.00 6-13/ services were provided? gram expend (i.e., total operating expenditures) to provide defense From: 0% 1 69/ services to indigents in the last to 1-5% 2 fiscal year? (month) 7"'(y-e-ar"""")-- 14-17/ 6-10% 3 11-15% 4 $____ ----:.00 55-62/ (month) (yeal') 18-21/ 16-25% 5 over 25% 6 Please specify the months and year 70-79/BK for which your answer is applicable: $____ ----:.00 22-29/

From: From: -:-_:--__ to to (month) (year) (month) 7'"(y-e-ar"""")-- 30-33/ 63-06/ (month) (year) 67-70/ (month) (year) 34-37/ 71-80/BK

48. Of this expended amount, how $ .00 38-45/ much came from each of the follow­ ing sources? (IF NONE, ENTER "Oil.) From: to AMOUNT (month) T(y-e-ar-')-- 46-49/

Directly from (month) (year) 50-53/

State $__ -,.00 6-13/ 50. How many felony cases involving indigent defendants in this program County $__ -,.00 14-21/ were disposed of by a plea of guilty prior to trial in 1981? City or town $__ -,.00 22-29/ 54-57/

Federal 51. What percentage of these cases government $___ ,~OO 30-37/ resulted in a defendant being sentenced to jail or prison? Costs of liti- gation (from ______---'% 58-60/ trial tax) $__ -,.00 38-45/

National Crimliw/ Defense Systems Study 47 Appendix B Modified instrunlent for telephone interviews

'llte 1982 National Survey 6. Please mail the completed 2. If any indigent criminal defense oC Criminal DeCense questionnaire within 20 days in the programs other than this program Program Questionnaire preaddressed, prepaid envelope serve the county, please list them by provided. While you are not required name and address below. (If yours is Abt Associates Inc. to respond, yoU!' cooperation is a public defender program, please 55 Wheeler Street appreciated to make this first also include those programs where Cambridge, Massachusetts 02148 national indigent criminal defense you have declared a conflict or are survey comprehensive, adequate, and otherwise unavailable.) timely. Your individual responses will be known only to the research CIRCLE TYPE OF PROGRAM Modified instl'ilment Cor telephone team and will remain confidential. interviews with respondents who did Primary Conflict Unavailability not complete man firm. ADMINISTERED BY TELEPHONE 1. TO "1st Round" 1-4/ Instructions for completing this questionnaire: PROGRAM NONRESPONDENTS 5/1 Primary Conflict Unavailability 1. The label at the bottom of this (See attached Call Record) 2. page contains the name of this indigent criminal defense program. 1. What type of indigent criminal It also lists the name of the study defense program is this? (CIRCLE county. We have identified your ALL THAT APPLY.) program as serving this county. Primary Conflict Unavailability When a question refers to "the A public defender program (under 3. county" you should answer only for this system, a salaried staff of the county on the label. If this full-time or part-time attorneys indigent criminal defense program render defense services through a does not serve some or all of the public or private nonprofit county, please contact Abt organization.) 1 6/ Associates Inc. at the designated (COMPLETE PART A) telephone number given below. INSTRUCTIONS An assigned counsel program (this 2. Please answer each question in system is characterized by the IF YOU CIRCLED "1" (PUBLIC sequence by circling the appropriate appointment from a list of private DEFENDER PROGRAM) IN number or code, and/or by printing bar members who accept cases on a QUESTION 1, COMPLETE PART A. the requested information in the judge-by-judge or court-by-court space provided. In some cases. you basis.) 2 7/ IF YOU CIRCLED "2" (ASSIGNED will be requested to skip certain (COMPLETE PART B) COUNSEL PROGRAM) OR "3" questions based on your response. (COORDINATED ASSIGNED For some questions you will be asked A coordinated assigned counsel COUNSEL PROGRAM) IN to circle all responses that apply. program (this system is similar to QUESTION 1, COMPLETE PART B. the assigned counsel system except 3. Based on your answer to Question that it has an administered com­ IF YOU CIRCLED "4" (PROGRAMS 1, you will be instructed on page 48 ponent and a set of rules and guide­ THAT USE CONTRACTS) IN to answer Parts A, B, and/or C of lines governing the appointment and QUESTION 1, COMPLETE PART C. this questionnaire. Please carefully processing of cases handled by the follow these instructions. All private bar.) 3 8/ IF YOU CIRCLED "5" (LA W respondents should complete Part D (COMPLETE PART B) SCHOOL CLINICAL PROGRAM) IN of this questionnaire, which begins QUESTION 1, SKIP TO PART D. on page 50. A program that uses contracts with individual attorney(s), bar IF YOU CIRCLED MORE THAN 4. If you do not know the answer to association(s), or private law ONE RESPONSE IN QUESTION 1 a question, write "DK" for don't firm(s) to provide representation (E.G., "1" and "2"), COMPLETE know. .!!!..reguired cases in the EACH INDICATED PART. jurisdiction. 4 9/ 5. If you have any questions or need (COMPLETE PART C) ALL RESPONDENTS SHOULD assistance in completing the ques­ COMPLETE PART D tionnaire, piease contact Cheryl A law school clinical program Vernon, Survey Director for this (under this system, law school Bureau of Justice Statistics survey, students and faculty from a law at this toll-free number: 1-800-343- clinic provide indigent defense 3019. services.) 5 10/

48 National Criminal Diif{!nse Systems Study P ART A: PUBLIC DEFENDER 7. In 1981, were lawyers in this 11. When assigned to represent PROGRAMS program required to represent indigent defendants in misdemeanor indigent defendants without cases, how are attorneys paid? ' ANSWER PART A IF YOU CIRCLED compensation? (CIRCLE ALL THAT (CIRCLE ONE. READ LIST IF "I" IN QUESTION 1 APPLY. READ LIST.) NECESSARY.)

3. How many full-time and part­ In every case involving an Misdemeanor cases not time public defender lawyers were indigent defendant represented employed by this program in 1981? (SKIP TO Q. 23~ 1 19/ (SKIP TO Q. 23) 0 39/ How many are employed currently? (IF NONE, ENTER "0".) In more than one-half the A separate out-{)f-court cases 2 20/ and in-court hourly Full-time: fue 1 1981 Currently In about one-half the cases 3 11-14 15-18/ 21/ A fee based on type ---- of appearance In less than one-half (SKIP TO Q. 23) 2 Part-time: the cases 4 22/ 1981 Currently A flat fee for appearance ___-:19-22 23-26/ When the public funds appro­ (SKIP TO Q. 23) 3 priated for representation 4. Is this public defender program of indigents ran out 5 23/ A flat fee for the (CIRCLE ONE-PLEASE BASE case 4 YOUR RESPONSE ON THE In no cases 6 24/ ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE, Other type of fee NOT THE FUNDING SOURCE.): 8. When assigned to represent (SPECIFY): indigent defendants in felrny cases, ______5 Part of the judicial how are attorneys paid? CIRCLE branch 0128-29/ ONE. READ LIST IF NECESSARY.) 12. What are the out-{)f-court and in-court hourly fees, flat fee, or Part of the State A separate out-{)f-court other fee paid to attorneys in executive branch 02 and in-court hourly fee 1 25/ misdemeanor cases?

An independent agency A fee based on type of Out-{)f-court fee of the State govern­ appearance (SKIP TO $ .00 per hour 40-41/ ment 03 Q.20) 2 In-court fee Part of county A flat fee for appearance $ .00 per hour 42-43/ government 04 (SKIP TO Q. 20) 3 Flat fee An independent non­ A flat fee for the case 4 $ .00 44-45/ profit organization 05 Other type of fee Other fee Other (SPECIFIY): (SPECIFY): $ .00 46-47/ 06 5 13. What is the maximum total fee 9. What are the out-{)f-court and in­ for a misdemeanor case allowed an PART B: court hourly fees, flat fee, or other attorney? ASSIGNED COUNSEL PROGRAMS fee paid to attorneys in felony $___ .00 48-51/ cases? No Maximum 1 52/ ANSWER PART B IF YOU CIRCLED "2" OR "3" IN QUESTION 1. Out-{)f-court fee $ .00 per hour 26-27/ 14. Does this program have a person other than a judge or clerk responsi­ 5. How many lawyers received ble for administering the program? appointments to represent indigent In-court fee defendants as part of this program in $ .00 per hour 28-29/ Yes 1 53/ 1981? Flat fee No 2 58-60/ BK $ .00 30-31/ PART C: CONTRACT ATTORNEY 6. Of the lawyers who received Other fee appointments to represent indigent $ .00 32-33/ PROGRAMS defendants as part of this program in ANSWER PART C IF YOU CIRCLED 1981, what was the minimum, the 10. What is the maximum total fee maximum, and the average number for a felony case allowed an­ "4" IN QUESTION 1. of cases per lawyer? attorney?

Minimum ______61-63/ $___ .00 34-37/ No Maximum 1 38/ Maxirr:urn, ______64-66/

Average ______67-69/

National Criminal Defense Systelns Study 49 15. To how many of the following Block Grant (i.e., representation 22. In which types of cases are groups were contracts awarded in is required for all cases in the counsel appointed when a defendant 1981 by this program to provide jurisdiction regardless of the cannot afford to hire a private representation to indigent criminal volume) 3 70/ attorney in the geographic juris­ defendants? (IF NOME, ENTER diction served by this program? "0". READ LIST.) Other type (SPECIFY): (CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY.) Individual sole practitioners ______4 71/ Felony 1 16/ 54-55/ 72/ 73/ Misdemeanor 2 17/ A law firm or a group of private attorneys joined solely to provide 19. Are contracts monitored by an Capital or indigent criminal representation office or individual independent from life imprisonment 3 18/ under the contract the contracting firm or lawyer? 56-57/ Juvenile (criminal) 4 19/ Yes 1 74/ Bar association No (SKIP TO Q. 30) 2 Juvenile (status 58-59/ offense) 5 20/ CONTRACT ADMINISTRATORS Nonprofit organization SHOULD ANSWER QUESTION 30 Family matters 60-61/ AND CASELOAD QUESTIONS IN (support payments, PART D FOR THE ENTIRE etc.) 1 21/ Other (SPECIFY): CONTRACT PROGRAM IN THE 62-63/ COUNTY IDENTIFIED ON THE Appeals 2 22/ 64/ COVER PAGE. CONTRACT RECIPIENTS SHOULD ANSWER Mental commitment 3 23/ 16. What governmental unit, agency, QUESTION 30 AND CASELOAD or individual is primarily responsible QUESTIONS IN PART D ONLY FOR Parole revocation 4 24/ for awarding contracts to provide THEIR ORGANIZATION. representation to indigent criminal Postconviction relief 5 25/ defendants? (CIRCLE ONE.) 20. Of attorneys who received indigent defendant cases under Other (SPECIFY): Judge 01 65-66/ contract in 1981, what was the 6 26/ minimum, the maximum, and the County 02 average number of cases per 23. In the geographic jurisdiction attorney? served by this program, who is City or town 03 responsible for making the final Minimum 6-8/ determination of whether a defend- Public defender 04 ------ant is indigent? (CIRCLE ONE) Maximum ______9-11/ Bar association 05 Public defender makes Average ______12-14/ the determination 1 27/ State 06 Any defendant requesting Other (SPECIFY): PARTD: GENERAL PROGRAM free representation is 07 CHARACTERISTICS given it 2

17. Are bids solicited before a ALL RESPONDENTS PLEASE A judge makes determi- contract is awarded (i.e., are COMPLETE PART D. nation of indigency from contracts competitively bid)? the bench 3 21. What is the geographic juris­ Yes 1 67/ diction served by this program? Court personnel make No 2 (CIRCLE ONE. READ LIST IF determination 4 NECESSARY.) 18. What types of contracts are Independent screeners awarded? (CIRCLE ALL THAT Part of the county make determination 5 APPLY.) (e.g., a city or town) 1 15/ Other (SPECIFY): 6 Fixed price (i.e., representation The entire county 2 is provided in a specified number and type of cases for a fixed Multicounty or judicial amount) 1 68/ district that includes part of the county 3 Cost plus fixed fee (i.e., repre­ sentation is provided at an esti­ Entire State 4 mated cost per case only until the total contract price is Other (SPECIFY): 5 reached) 2 69/

50 National Criminal Difense Systems Study ------,-----

24. Please indicate the percentage 26. How many of each of the appeal, misdemeanor, etc.), of each of the following types of following types of cases involving arising out of one event cases in the entire count in 1981 indigent defendants did this program or a group of related contem­ that involved indigent de1 endants. receive in total in 1987? OF NONE, poraneous events, brought (CIRCLE ONE RESPONSE FOR ENTER "0". READ LIST.) contemporaneously against EACH TYPE OF CASE. FOR EACH Number one client 03 TYPE OF CASE, DETERMINE Type of PERCENTAGE INVOLVING of cases As immediately above, but a INDIGENT DEFENDANTS.) case received misdemeanor that is charged along with a related felony Percentage Felony 55-58/ is considered part of the of cases felony case 04 In county Type of Cases Involving Mental Misdemeanor 59-62/ IndIgent Fel- Misde- Ju- commit- Ap­ One or more charges, alle­ defendants ony meanor venile ment peal Capital or life gations, or proceedings that 0-10% 01 01 01 01 01 imprisonment 63-66/ have the same court docket 11-30% 02 02 02 02 02 number 05 31-40% 03 03 03 03 03 Juvenile 41-50% 04 04 04 04 04 (criminal) 67-70/ One or more charges, alle­ 51-60% 05 05 05 05 05 61-70% 06 06 06 06 06 gations, or proceedings with 71-9n% 07 07 07 07 07 Juvenile the same prosecutor case 91-100% 08 08 08 Oil 08 (status offense) 71-74/ number 06 29-30/32-33/ 35-36/ 38-39/ 41-42/ Family matters Any project, activity, or CIRCLE WHETHER YOUR ANSWER IS (support payments, record that requires creation etc.) 75-78/ of a new file jacket 07 Estimated 1 1 Documented by Appeals 6-9/ 28. Which of the following staff existing data 2 2 2 2 2 does this program employ? (CIRCLE 31/ 34/ 37/ 40/ 43/ Mental ONE ANSWER FOR EACH.) If commitment 10-13/ employed, how many are full-time or 25. In which of the following types part-time? of cases does this program represent Parole revoc~tion 14-17/ Full­ Part­ indigents? (CIRCLE ALL THAT Yes No time time APPLY. READ LIST.) Postconviction relief 18-21/ Investigator 1 2 34/ __35-36/ __37-38/ Felony 1 44/ Social worker 2 39/ __40-41/ __42-43/ Other (SPECIFY): 22-25/ Secretary 1 2 59/ __60-61/ __62-63/ Misdemeanor 2 45/ Capital or life TOTAL 26-30/ 29. Has the method of providing imprisonment 3 46/ representation to indigent defendants in the county been Juvenile (criminal) 4 47/ CIRCLE WHETHER revised, reformed, or reorganized YOUR ANSWER IS: within the past 3 years? Juvenile (status offense) 5 48/ Estimated 1 31/ Yes 1 48/ No 2 Family matters Documented by (support payments, existing data 2 30. How much money did the county etc.) 1 49/ expend (i.e., total operating 27. Which of the following best expenditures) for the provision of Appeals 2 50/ describes how this program defines a defense services to indigents in the case? (CIRCLE ONE. READ LIST) last fiscal year? Mental commitment 3 51/ One single charge against one $___ ---.:.00 55-62/ Parole revocation 4 52/ or more defendants 01 32-33/ Please specify the months and year Postconviction relief 5 53/ One or more charges, alle­ for which your answer is applicable: gations, or proceedings Other (SPECIFY): 6 54/ that normally would be From: handled at a single trial or hearing 02 (month) 7"(y-e-a-r'"")-- to 63-66/ One or more charges, alle­ (month) (year) 67-70/ gations, or proceedings 71-80 BK within a sIJecific case category (felony, juvenile,

National Criminal De.(e/lSe Systems Study 51 31. Of this expended amount, how 32. How much money did this pro- much came from each of the follow- gram expend (i.e., total operating ing sources? (IF NONE, ENTER "0".) expenditures) to provide defense services to indigents in the four AMOUNT fiscal years prior to the last fiscal year reported in Q. 47. Directly from (PLEASE ENTER MOST RECENT ON FIRST LINE BELOW AND WORK State $ .00 6-13/ BACK WARDS.)

County $ .00 14-21/ Please specify the months and year for which your answer is applicable. City or town $ .00 22-29/ Fiscal year prior to last fiscal year. Federal government $ .00 30-37/ $ .00 62-69/ Costs of liti- gation (from From: trial tax) $ .00 38-45/ to (month) (year) 70-73/ Other (SPECIFY) $ .00 46-53/ (month) (year) 74-77/

$ .00 6-13/ TOTAL $ .00 54-61/ From: TOTAL SHOULD EgUAL ANSWER to IN g. 47 (month) (year) 14-17/

(month) (year) 18-21/

$ .00 22-29/

From: to (month) (year) 30-33/

(month) (year) 34-37/

$ .00 38-45/

From: to (month) (year) 46-49/

(month) (year) 50-53/

52 National Criminal Defense Systems Study Appendix C State profiles

Alabama Hears de novo appeals from District part-time referees who are licensed Court in criminal and juvenile cases to practice law. Counties selected for survey: and also in cases from Municipal 1. Jefferson 9. Marshall Court and Probate Court. Juvenile hearings may be conducted 2. Mobile 10. Madison by referee, with right for rehearing 3. Lauderdale 11. Etowah Family Court (7 courts) before a judge. 4. Sumter 12. Talladega 5. Tuscaloosa 13. Montgomery Established as a division of Circuit Magistrates 6. Limestone 14. Pike Court by legislation of local applica­ 7. Dallas 15. Lee tion. Magistrates Agent.!y created 8. Chilton 16. Houston September 1, 1976, which includes Has jUrisdiction in juvenile and all clerks of trial courts and others. Court of last resort: domestic relations cases. Divided into District Court and Alabama Supreme Court Courts of limited or special Municipal Courts Divisions. jurisdiction: Has original jurisdiction to issue Powers limited to- necessary writs and to answer ques­ District Court (Each county tions of State law as certified by a constitutes a district and has a Issuing arrest warrants. Federal court. District Court.) lssuing arrest warrants (District Has statewide appellate jurisdiction Has jurisdiction over misdemeanors Court Division on1y). on writ of certiorari from inter­ and ordinance violations (except mediate courts of appeal. where a municipal court exists). Granting bail in minor misdemeanor cases and under direction of court. !ntermediate appellate court: May not hear felonies and misde­ meanors that originated by Grand Receiving guilty pleas in minor Court of Criminal Appeals Jury indictment. misdemeanor cases where schedule of fines has been set. May issue all necessary writs. May hold preliminary hearings in felony cases and accept guilty pleas Defense services to indigents Has exclusive appellate jurisdiction in cases not punishable by death. over all felonies, misdemeanors (in­ Statutory scheme cluding ordinance violations and Probate Court habeas corpus). An indigent defense system for each Sits in each county. circuit and district court of a county Court of Civil Appeals is determined as follows: Has original jurisdiction in probate 10 in circuits with two or less judges, May issue all necessary writs. of estates, guardianship, and other the presiding judge selects the cases. system to be used Has exclusive appellate jurisdiction (! in circuits with three or more in all civil cases where amount Municipal courts: jUdges, a majority of judges selects involved does not exceed $10,000; all the system to be used appeals from administrative agencies Municipal Court o in municipal courts, the governing except Public Service Commission, body of the muniCipality selects the Established in each municipality, domestic relations cases, and all system to be used. extraordinary writs arising in said except those that by ordinance chose cases. not to have such courts. In each circuit an indigent defense Has jurisdiction in all municipal commission is established. The Courts of general trial jurisdiction: commission, among other duties, ordinance violations. advises the presiding circuit judge on Circuit Court Has concurrent jurisdiction with the system to be used. District Court for violations of State Sits in each county. Statute: Ala. Code Sec. 15-12-2 et law committed within police juris­ seq. State divided into 39 judicial dis­ diction and which may be prosecuted as breaches of municipal ordinance. tricts, each composed of from 1 to 5 Actual system counties. Magistrates: Six counties in Alabama provide Has jurisdiction in all felony public defender services. The other Referees prosecutions and in misdemeanors 61 operate on an assigned counsel and ordinance violations that are basis. included within the felony charge. District Court may appoint full- or

National Criminal Drifense Systems Study 53 Appendix C

GWM

Costs Alaska Court of general trial juridiction: Indigent defense programs in each The sta te of Alaska has no coun­ Superior Court county are reimbursed for their ties. Survey will examine all four services from the "Fair Trial Tax judicial districts. Sits in all four judicial districts. Fund" in the State treasury. Revenues for the "fund" are derived Court of last resort: A unified court. primarily from a $7 fee (increased from $2 in May 1981) imposed in Alaska Supreme Court Has original jurisdiction in all criminal cases only upon con­ criminal and civil matters, including viction. In addition, a $10 fee is May issue injunctions, writs and all but not limited to probate and imposed in each civil case in circuit other processes necessary for com­ guardianship of minors and court in which a jury is requested. plete exercise of its jurisdiction. incompetents. The State legislature also has annually provided an appropriation of Has final appellate jurisdiction in all Exercises jurisdiction in matters $100,000 to the Fair Trial Tax Fund. actions and proceedings. Appeal of involving juveniles. right, however, lies only in those Total costs by source: cases where there is no appeal of Has appellate jurisdiction over State $4,238,266 right to the Court of Appeals. matters appealed from subordinate County Supreme Court may exercise its courts and administrative agencies. Other discretion to review a final decision Appeals are on the record unless Total $4,238,266 of the Court of Appeals upon appli­ Superior Court grants trial de novo. cation of a party. Assigned counsel ra tes Courts of limited or special Intermediate appellate court: jurisdiction: Rates set by statute. Intermediate Court of Appeals District Court Hourly rate: Out-of-court $20 May issue injunctions, writs, etc., for In each judicial District- In-court $40 complete exercise of jurisdiction. Civil jurisdiction limited to actions not exceeding $10,000 and small Maximums: Has appellate jurisdiction in actions claims under $2,000. No distinction made in capital cases. from Superior Court: Trial $1,000 o criminal prosecutors Misdemeanors and ordinance Postconviction o postconviction relief violations. remedies $600 6) juvenile ca3es Other o extradition and habeas corpus Magistrate Court I) probation ancl parole revocation Appeals (hourly rates): proceedings Similar criminal jurisdiction to Out-of-court $40 o bail review District Court. In-court $40 I) sentence review. Maximum $1,000 Civil Jurisdiction in small claims Review of District Court actions: under $2,000. Flat rate or per diem: I) same as for Superior Court Felony None o appeal of right to Court of Municipal courts: Misdemeanor None Appeals, except: Appeal None I) if waived and appeal taken to None. Other None Superior Court. o State has no right to test suf­ Magistrates: Expense limits: ficiency of indictment or infor­ Investiga tors mation and review of sentences Appointed by judges of Superior Expert witnesses alleged to be lenient. Court or Administrative Director of r'ranscripts Courts. Social services Discretionary Review: Travel o final decision of Superior Court Masters have no authority to issue Total $500 from review of District Court in orders but can make findings and categories listed above recommendations to Superior Court (Statute provides that counsel shall o review of sentence imposed by jUdge for his or her disposition. be reimbursed for any expense District Court and appealed to reasonably incurred allowing for Superior Court. reasonable expenses up to one-half of the allowable attorney fee.)

54 National Criminal Defense Systems Study " MI' Sf Defense services to indigents Appeals: Arizona Out-of-court $40 Statutory scheme In-court $40 All 14 counties selected for survey. Maximum By statute, Alaska has 'created a Court of last resort: statewide public defender program Flat rate or per diem: which handles all cases involving Felony None Arizona Supreme Court indigent defendants, including mis­ Misdemeanor None demeanors, felonies, juvenile cases, Appeal None Has appellate jurisdiction in all mental health cases, and appeals. Other None actions and proceedings.

The agency is created in the Office Expense limits: Direct appeal is permitted in cases of the Governor. In addition to Investiga tors where life imprisonment or the death direct staff representation, the Expert witnesses penalty is imposed. public defender may contract with Transcripts one or more private attorneys to Social services Intermediate appellate court: provide indigent representation. Travel Total None Court of Appeals Statute: Alaska Stat. Sec. 18.85.010 et. seq. Two divisions: Phoenix and Tucson.

Actual system Has jurisdiction in all actions and proceedings permitted by law to be The Alaska public defender program appealed from Superior Court, ex­ is organized within each of the four cept cases where death or life im­ judicial districts and provides serv­ prisonment is imposed. ices through regional offices. Court of general trial jurisdiction: Costs Superior Court All funds for indigent defense serv­ ices in Alaska are provided through H~s original jurisdiction in felony, State funds. misdemeanor, juvenile, and probate Total costs by source: matters. State $3,525,100 County Has appellate jurisdiction over Other Justice of Peace Courts. Total $3,525,100 Courts of limited or special Assigned counsel ra tes jurbdiction:

Rates set by court rule statewide. Justice of Peace Courts

By Alaska Stat. Sec. 18.85.130(a) Has jut'isdiction in following criminal attorneys "shall be awarded reason­ matters: able compensation according to a o preliminary hearings in felony schedule of fees promulgated by the cases supreme court••.. " This schedule of o misdemeanors and other offenses fees is included in Rule 39 of Alaska punishable by fine not exceeding Criminal Rules. $1,000 or 6 months in jail (con­ current jurisdiction with Superior Hourly rate: Court). Out-of-court $40 In-court $40 Municipal courts:

Maximums: City Magistrate Court

None Has jurisdiction over all cases arising under municipal ordinances and con­ current jurisdiction with Justice of Peace Courts over State law vio­ lations committed within city limits.

National C,iminal Dejense Systems Study 55 Appendix C

he ¥ A '"P"

Magistrates: Assigned counsel ra tes Expert witnesses (by statute) appointed by the court in a sanity Court Commissioner Rates set by custom in jurisdiction hearing shall be allowed such fees as and judge discretion. the court in its discretion deems Appointed by Superior Court judge. reasonable. By Arizona Rules of Court, after Generally hears default matters, review of the claim, "the court shall Apart from these statutes, the initial appearances in criminal cases, award the attorney a sum repre­ expense limits allowed are deter­ and certain "show cause" matters. senting reasonable compensation for mined by the individual judges. the services provided." Referee Investigators $15/hr By Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. Sec. 13- max $250 Appointed by Superior Court judge 4013(a), appointed counsel shall Expert witnesses assigned to juvenile cases. receive compensation in such amount Trnnscripts as the court in its discretion deems Social services Similar powers to that of Court reasonable." Fee schedules, there­ Travel .15/mile Com missioner in juvenile cases. fore, vary throughout the State. Total Traffic Hearing Officer Hourly rate: Out-of-court $40 Appointed by Superior Court in ($45- juvenile matters to hear cases for felony) children under 18 in non felonious motor vehicle violations. These figures represent the most commonly reported rates for Defense services to indigents counties surveyed.

Statutory scheme Maximums: Capital case The Board of County Supervisors Felony $1,000- may establish a public defender $2,500 office in any county with a popu­ Misdemeanor $1,000- lation exceeding 100,000. Otherwise $2,500 the supervisors provide funds for Other either an assigned counsel program or a contract with the private bar. These figures represent the range of Statutes: Arizona Rev. Stat. Ann. responses in surveyed counties. Sec. 11-581 et. seq. Appeals (hourly rate): Actual system None. There are two public defender pro­ grams in Arizona, Phoenix (Maricopa Flat rate or per diem: County) and Tucson (Pima County). Felony None Misdemeanor None Five counties provide indigent Appeal None defense services through assigned Other None counsel programs and seven through contracts with the private bar. Expense lim its:

By statute in a capital case, the court shall appoint such investigators Indigent defense services are paid and expert witnesses as it deems for entirely by each county. reasonable at trial and any sub­ sequent proceedings. Total costs by source: State County $8,613,624 Other $7,615 Total $8,621,239

56 National Criminal Defense Systems Study GW·

Arkansas Probate Court Police Court

Counties selected for survey: Linked to Chancery Court-same May be established in cities of 500 to 1. Pulaski 10. Marion judges. 2,000. 2. Benton 11. Lonoke 3. Washington 12. Union Hears all probate matters, including Same jurisdiction as Justice of Peace 4. Sebastian 13. Arkansas guardianships, adoptions, and mental Court. 5. Miller 14. Sharp commitment cases. 6. Johnson 15. Poinsett Also has jurisdiction in ordinance 7. Conway 16. Phillips Courts of limited or special violations. 8. Clark 17. Mississippi jurisdiction: 9. Saline Magistra tes: County Court Court of last resort: Master in Chancery One County Court with one judge in Arkansas Supreme Court each of the State's 75 counties. Appointed by judge to subpoena witnesses, rule on admissibility of Has general superintending control Has exclusive jurisdiction in all evidence, and generally conduct over all trial courts of law and matters relating to county, including hearings on contested issues of fact equity. paupers, etc. and report findings to court.

Has power to issue all writs and In absence of Circuit judge, may Standing Master orders in aid of its appellate and issue certain writs. supervisory jurisdiction. Chancery Court master in divorce Court of Common Pleas cases. Appellate review of appeals from Court of Appeals, Circuit Court, and Established by certain counties, Referee in Probate Chancery Court are in Supreme including Lonoke and Mississippi Court's discretion. Counties. Referee (County Court) Intermediate appellate court: Has limited civil jurisdiction. Hears juvenile cases. Referee has same powers as County Court judge, Court of .. ,Appeals Justice of Peace Courts and findings are binding on County Court. Has authority to issue all orders and Conducts preliminary hearings in writs necessary to support its juris­ felony cases. Appeals are de novo to circuit diction. court. Referees have been appoi"ted Jurisdiction over misdemeanor cases. in 43 of the State's 75 counties. Has such appellate jurisdiction as granted by Supreme Court Rule. City Courts Referee (Municipal Court) Courts of general trial jurisdiction: Mayors of towns and second-class Small claims actions. cities (populations SOil to 2,000) are Circuit Court vested with judicial powers of Defense services to indigents Justice of Peace. State divided into 22 judicial dis­ Statutory scheme tricts from 1 to 7 counties each. Has same jurisdiction as Police and There is a circuit court in each Justice of Peace Courts. Under the State Public Defender county. Act, when the majority of the legis­ o has original jurisdiction in all civil Municipal courts: lators of any judicial district (there and criminal cases are 20 with 2 to 6 counties in each) o has appellate jurisdiction over all Municipal Court petition the Governor to create a courts of limited jurisdiction. public defender office in their judi­ Any city of more than 2,400 can cial district, the Governor creates a Chancery Court establish a municipal court by Public Defender Commission in that ordinance. district composed of the county Same organization as Circuit Courts. judge or judges of the district and Has exclusive jurisdiction over the circuit judge or judges. Has exclusive jurisdiction in, among ordinance violations where there is other cases, juvenile matters, in­ no city court, and has concurrent A district may apply at each regular cluding delinquency. jurisdiction with Justice of Peace or special session of the legislature. Courts within city limits.

National Criminal Defense Systems Study 57 Appendix C

Each commission appoints the Public attorney and the time and the effort California Defender for a 4-year term. devoted to the preparation and trial, commensurate with fees paid other Counties selected for sUI'vey: In addition, by statute in 1977 the attorneys in the community for simi­ 1. Los Angeles 9. Riverside legislature authorized the judge of lar services. 2. Orange 10. San Bernadino any appropriate court to appoint and 3. San Diego 11. Kern compensate private counsel. Appeals: 4. Santa Clara 12. Contra Costa 5. Alameda 13. Siskiyou Statute: Ark. Stat. Ann. Sec. 43- Informal maximum is $350 per case. 6. San Francisco 14. Sacramento 3304 et. seq. In special circumstances, larger 7. San Mateo 15. Merced amounts may be approved. 8. Santa Barbara 16. Butte Actual system Flat rate or per diem: Felony None Court of last resort: Eighteen counties in Arkansas are Misdemeanor None served primarily by public defender Appeal None California Supreme Court programs. The remaining 57 coun­ Other None ties are served by assigned counsel Has original jurisdiction in habeas programs. Expense limits: corpus, mandamus, prohibition, and certiorari. Costs By statute, the amount allowed for investigation shall not exceed $100. Has direct appeal in all death All costs of providing indigent penalty cases. defense services in Arkansas are paid by the individual counties. Any party may petition for review after Court of Appeals decision. Total costs by source: State Supreme Court may take cases on its County $1,614,030 own motion. Other $20,000 Total $1,634,030 Intermediate appellate court:

Assigned counsel rates Courts of Appeal Rates set by statute, custom in Has original jurisdiction in habeas jurisdiction, and judge discretion. corpus, mandamus, prohibition, and certiorari. By statute (Ark. Stat. Ann. Sec. 43- 2419) when any court in the State With exception of death penalty appoints private counsel (whether cases, all appeals are to this court felony or misdemeanor) such court from Superior Court. shall determine the amount of the fee and amount for reasonable in­ Cases appealed from inferior courts vestigation and make an order for to Superior Court may be transferred the county for payment. to Courts of Appeal. The statute also sets minimum and Court of general trial jurisdiction: maximum limits of compensation, as reported below. Superior Court Hourly rate: In each county there is a Superior Court of one or more judges. This figure represents the most commonly reported rate for counties Has trial jurisdiction in all felony surveyed: cases. Out-of-court $50 In-court $50 Has original jurisdiction in habeas corpus and other extraordinary Maximums: proceedings. By statute, the amount of compensa­ Handles juvenile, probate, and other tion for attorney's fee shall not be cases. less than $25 nor more than $350 based on the experience of the

58 National Criminal D£!{ense Systems Study ¥-

Has appellate jurisdiction over Board of Supervisors. Such fees and Maximums: Municipal and Justice Courts. expenses agreed upon cannot exceed the amount of funds allocated by the The majority of counties set no Courts of limited or special Board of Supervisors for the cost of maximum fee. jurisdic tion: aSSigned counsel in such cases. Appeals: Municipal Court Statute: Cal. Gov. Code Sec. 27700 et. seq. By statute, in any case in which Has trial jurisdiction in misdemeanor counsel other than a public defender cases. Actual system is appointed on appeal to the Supreme Court, counsel shall receive MagistratE!s in preliminary pro­ Forty-nine counties in California a reasonable sum for compensation ceedings for felony cases, until provide primary representation and necessary expenses to be deter­ probable cause for a bindover to through a county defender program. mined by the court and such payment Superior Court. The other nine counties are served shall be made by the State. through contracts with private Justice Court attorneys or contracts with local bar Flat rate or per diem: associations. Felony None Established in judicial districts with Misdemeanor None 40,000 residents or less. Costs Appeal None Other None Same jurisdiction as Municipal The majority of funds for indigent Courts. defense services in California are Expense limits: provided by the counties. The State Investigators None Municipal courts: funds the State appellate defender Expert witnesses None program and provides a small sum Transcripts None Municipal Court for the local county programs. Social services None Travel None See "Courts of limited or special Total costs by source: Total None jurisdiction." State $10,778,000* County $150,874,178 See statutory comments under Magistrates: Other $5,108,916 "Rates set by statute." Total $166,761,094 Referees are appointed by all courts In addition, by statute in capital with various duties. *This figure includes $7,003,000 in cases, counsel for the defendant may State funding for the Sta te appellate request from the court funds for Temporary judges may also be defender program. specific payment of investigators, appointed. experts and others for the prepa­ Assigned counsel ra tes ration or presentation of the Defense services to indigents defense. Rates set by custom in jurisdiction Statutory sch~me and judge discretion.

By statute, the Board of Supervisor1i By Cal. Penal Code Sec. 987.2 et of any county may establish a public seq. and Sec. 1241, where there is no defender for the county. public defender or public defender cannot represent a defender, the Two or more counties may join and court may appoint a private lawyer form a joint public defender. who shall be paid a reasonable sum for compensation and for necessary The supervisors also must determine expenses, the amount of which shall whether the public defender should by paid out of the general fund 01' be appointed or elected, the county. By statute, where there is no public The result is a wide discrepancy in defender, or because of a conflict fee schedule among the counties. with the public defender or for other reasons, private counsel can be ap­ Hourly rate: pointed by the appropriate court. The hourly rate ranges from $20/25 In addition, the court may contract to $45/50 in various counties with one or more responsible throughout Cali fornia. attorneys after consultation with the

National Cdminal Difense Systems Study 59 Appendix C

=== Colorado o Denver District Court has original Denver Juvenile Court jurisiction in civil and criminal cases Counties selected for survey: only Commissioner may hear any case 1. Boulder 9. Weld o all but Denver District Court may within court's jurisdiction and report 2. Jefferson 10. Moffat review any final jUdgment of any findings and recommendations to the 3. Arapahoe 11. Mesa county court within the District. court. 4. Denver 12. La Plata 5. Adams 13. Pitkan Courts of limited or special County Court 6. EI Paso 14. Fremont jurisdiction: 7. Larimer 15. Douglas Small Claims Referee 8. Pueblo 16. Bent Denver Superior Court Defense services to the indigent Court of last resort: Original jurisdiction in civil actions concurrent with Denver District Statutory scheme Colorado Supreme Court Court. In Colorado, a statewide public Has Power to issue writs and other Exclusive appellate jurisdiction, defender program has been created orders. including de novo trials, over cases as an agency of the State judicial appealed from County Court. department. Court may give its opinion on important questions when required Denver Probate Court The Colorado Supreme Court by the Governor or Legislature. appoints!1 five-member public Exclusive jurisdiction in delinquency defender commission to administer Has final appellate review over cases and ~ll other actions involving the program. every final judgment of all trial children. courts. An individual judge has the authority Denver Juvenile Court to appoint a member of the private Has other appellate review as bar when the public defender provided by law. Original and exclusive jurisdiction in declares a "conflict. I! all probate matters. Intermediate appellate courts: Statute: Col. Rev. Stat. Sec. 21-1- County Court 101 et. seq. Courts of Appeal Except in Denver, has concurrent Actual system Has no original jurisdiction. jurisdiction with District Court in misdemeanor actions (not including Colorado has a sta tewide public Has initial jurisdiction over appeals juvenile). defense system with 19 field offices, from District Court, Superior an appellate office, and a central Court, Denver Juvenile court with Handles all preliminary matters in office serving 63 counties. the following (among other) ex­ felony cases. ceptions: It has been the practice in the past, o cases where the constitutionality Municipal courts: when the public defender system is of a statute or municipal charter is funded below constitutional in question Municipal Court standards, to restrict the number of o writs of habeas corpus cases it will accept. o cases appAaled from the County Established pursuant to local Court to the District Court or ordinance; does not have to be a Private lawyers would then be Superior Court court of rpcord. appointed by the COUl't and paid from o cases appealed from the Municipal the court-appointed counsel budget, Court to the District Court or Tries all municipal ordinance at a cost which is 95.1 % higher than Superior Court. violations. public defender costs per case. Court of general trial jurisdiction: Magistrates: Recently, however, in an attempt to reduce such costly utilization of District Court Referees: assigned counsel in overload situations, the State Public Defender There are 22 judicial districts of 1 to District Court contracted with the State Judicial 7 counties. Each county has a Department for additional money District Court. Water Referee. and hired extra attorneys as public o has original jurisdiction, except in defender staff. city and county of Denver, in all Domestic Relations Referee. criminal, civil, probate and juvenile cases

60 National Criminal Defense Systems Study I,

HI, OM 'ii! .£1 '.

Costs Appeals (hourly rates): Connecticut Out-of-court $25 The costs of providing defense In-court $35 All eight counties contacted for services to indigents in Colorado is Maximum survey. provided exclusively by the Sta teo Flat rate or per diem: Felony None Court of last resort: Total costs by source: Misdemeanor None State $8,468,313 Appeal None Connecticut Supreme Court County Other None Other Has power to issue all extraordinary Total $8,468,313 Expense limits: writs.

Assigned counsel ra tes There are no maximum expenses Appeals from final judgments of except as ordered by the individual Superior Court are taken to Supreme Rates set by court rule statewide. judge, usually at the time of the Court, except: counsel's appointment. o small claims Colo. Rev. Stat. Sec. 21-1-105 o decisions of administrative stipulates that "the court shall fix agencies reasonable compensation for an o those matters in exclusive attorney appointed at any stage of jurisdiction of Appellate Sessions of the proceeding or on t1ppeal." Superior Court.

Such fees were established by No right for further review of Supreme Court Order CJD No.6. Appellate Sessions in Superior Court, except by certification by the Appel­ Hourly rate: late Session or by two judges of Out-of court $25 Supreme Court. In-court $35* Intermediate appellate court: *Includes preliminary hearings. Appellate sessions of the Superior Maximums: Court Capital case Has no original jurisdiction. Trial $3,000 No trial $1,500 Jurisdiction limited to: (class 1 felony) o criminal nonsupport cases o criminal actions when maximum Felony penalty allowed is a $5,000 fine and/or 5 years imprisonment, and Trial $1,500 fine imposed is no more than $1,000 No trial $750 and/or sentencing of 1 year. (class 2) Ordinance violations. Trial $1,000 No trial $500 Any paternity proceedings. (classes 3,4,5) Any non felony traffic proceedings. Trial $1,000 No trial $500 Court of general trial jurisdiction: (Juvenile) Superior Court Trial $200 No trial $100 Sole court of original jurisdiction for (Guardian; Ad Litem) all causes of action, except for original jurisdiction of Probate Misdemeanor Court.

Trial $200 Family Division hears domestic No trial $100 relations and juvenile matters.

Hears appeals from Probate Court and administrative agencies.

National Criminal Drifellse Systems Study 61 AppendixC

" me:cJri!7' .I Okii::;"'" Courts of limited or special Actual system For any case declared "on trial," jurisdiction: regardless of classification or Indigent defense in Connectiallt is penalty, the allowable fees are as Proba te Court provided through a centrally follows: administered, statewide system. I;) $12.50 per hour for both in-court Usual testamentary proceedings. and out-of-court time; and The chief Public Defender has I;) $75 per day maximum. Termination of parental rights, headquarters in IIartford (with a adoptions, guardianships, mental branch office in New Haven) out of The same hourly and maximum rates commitment proceedings, etc. which all branch offices are apply to Class A, B, and C felonies administered. (or crimes with a penalty of more Municipal courts: than 10 years) when not on trial. Branch offices are located in each of None. the 12 Judicial Districts and in 19 of For Class D felonies, all m isde­ the 22 geographical areas. meanors, or crimes with a penalty of Magistrates: less than 10 years not on trial, There are, in addition, three offices attorneys can bill only for court Superior Court Commissioner providing services to juvenile indi­ appearance time. gents. All members of State bar in good The allowable fees are: standing are designated as Com­ Costs o $12.50 per hour; and missioners of Superior COUI't. Names o $35 per day. from list are chosen to hear small All costs of providing defense claims matters. services to indigents in Connecticut Again, out-<>f-court costs are not are provided by the State. paid for in these classes of crimes. May sign writs and subpoenl'.s, and There are no set overall maximums among other powers, can take Total costs by source: for any class of crime. depositions and issue subpoenas. State $4,524,870 County In addition, there are no set limits Defensive services to indigents Other for expenses such as investigators, Total $4,524,870 expert witnesses, transcripts, social Statutory scheme services or travel. Assigned counsel rates Connecticut General Statutes, Such expenses must be approved by Chapter 887, Sections 51-289 Assigned counsel fees for the State the Public Defender for the Com­ through 51-300 (effective 1978) of Connecticut are established by mission prior to being incurred and provide for the following statewide the Chief Public Defender pursuant are paid out of the Commission organization: to C.C.S. Sec. 51-291(L). budget, pel' C.C.S. Sec. 51-292. o establishment of Public Defender Services Commission (7 members, :1- The fees are based on a distinction Fee schedule for attorneys in year terms), an autonomous body made between cases considered "on i!:!venile court within JUdicial Department for fiscal trial" and those involved in pre­ and budgetary purposes only liminary or post-trial proceedings. Noncourt time-preparation o appointment of Chief Public o $15.00 per hour for first 3 hours of Defender and Deputy Chief Public Therefore, certain types of cases preparation Defender (4-year terms) to admin­ will be billed at different rates at o any time beyond 3 hours to be ister program diiferent stages of the proceedings. compensated at the rate of $12.50 (I appointment of personnel and pro­ per hour. vision of facilities, etc. to offer All cases "on trial" are billed defense services to indigents in each according to the same schedule; fees Court time-adjudicatory, judicia! district for cases not on trial differ disposition, continuances, plea o appointment of Special Public according to type and class of case. sessions Defenders (from a list) in habeas o continuances, plea sessions, or any corpus, conflict, and some juvenile Traditional distinctions between in­ other hearing requiring less than 30 cases, to be paid from budget of court and out-of-court fees are not minutes, up to a maximum of $25.00 Public Defender Services Com­ generally made, except in the case G $50.00 ior court hearing, mission. The public defender sets of Class D felonies and misde­ adjudicatory or dispositive, on the the compensation for these members meanors, which can be billed only for merits, which requires more than 30 of the private bar. court appearanc(' time if not "on minutes and does not last more than tl.'ial." 5 hours Statute: Conn. Gen. Stat. Pmn. Sec. 51-289 et. seq.

62 National Climinal Defense Systems Study ! VA u b '" o a hearing on the merits, lasting Delaware Justice of Peace Court more than 5 hours can be compensated up to maximum of All three counties contacted for Limited criminal jurisdiction in $75.00 per day. survey. minor misdemeanor cases and non felonious traffic cases (except in Detention hearings Court of last resort: Wilmington). o $25.00 for a hearing of an hour or less Delaware Supreme Court Not a court of record. o any hearing lasting beyond an hour, up to maximum of $50.00. May issue all extraordinary writs. Municipal. courts:

May determine questions of law Municipal Court of Wilmington certified to it by other courts. Conducts preliminar~ i'lf~,,;,"ings in May render advisory opinion felonies and drug related misde­ regarding State and Federal meanors. constitutional law upon request of Governor. Criminal jurisdiction in Wilmington in misdemeanor, municipal ordi­ Has appellate jurisdiction in all nance, and traffic violation cases. criminal cases. Alderman's Court Intermediate appellate courts: Limited to minor misdemeanors, None. traffic offenses, and parking violations. Court of general trial jurisdiction: Magistrates: Court of Chancery Family Court Master Equity jurisdiction only. Hears family court matters. Superior Court Municipal Court Commissioners Exclusive jurisdiction in felony cases, except those involving Take citizen complaints. juveniles. Issue warrants and summons. Civil cases. Take bail bond applications. Parental rights and adoption. Defense services ~o indigents Appellate jurisdiction over Court of Common Pleas, administrative agen­ Statutory scheme cies, Alderman's Court, Municipal Court, and Justice of Peace Court. In Delaware a statewide public All appeals are de novo. defender office has been created by the legislature. Courts of limited or special jurisdiction: The public defender is selected by the Governor for a 6-year term. Family Court For cause, the court may on its own Exclusive jurisdiction in child abuse, motion, or upon the application of abandonment, and misdemeanor the public defender, appoint private crimes against children. counsel and award reasonable compensation. Exclusive jurisdiction in dependent, neglect, and delinquency cases. Statute: Del. Code Ann. Sec. 4601 et. seq.

National Criminal D£ifense Systems Study 63 Appendix C

?!It ¥ "3$ '2

Actual system set by court rule. A typical example District of Columbia would be: Delaware has a sta tewide public Out-of-court $25 Entire district included in survey. defender for all eligible defendants, In-court $35 with about 5% of the cases handled Court of last resort: by assigned counsel because of Maximums: conflicts. Court of Appeals In some counties there are no 'rhe program has regional offices in specified maximums. Implied power to issue extraordinary each of the State's three counties. writs in aid of its appellate juris­ In other counties an award larger diction. Costs than a certain amount (e.g., $500) needs a court finding that the case All final orders and judgments of All costs for the operation of the was "complicated and extended." Superior Court, including inter­ statewide public defender program locutoryorder. are provided by the State. In addition, an award larger than a higher specified amount (e.g., Criminal jurisdiction does not The cost of assigned counsel $1,000) must be reviewed by the include any judgment with a fine of representation is provided by the county attorney who can present an less than $50 for an offense punish­ counties. objection. able by 1 year of imprisonment, or a fine of not more than $1,000. Total costs by source: Appeals: State $1,759,700 Review possible only upon applica­ County $88,905 None. tion of party, and is in Court's Other discretion. Total $1,848,605 Flat rate or per diem: Intermediate appellate court: Assigned counsel rates None. None. Rates set by custom in jurisdiction Expense limits: and judge discretion. Court of general trial jurisdiction: In some counties, contract attorneys Del. Code Ann. tit. 29, Sec. 4605 pay their travel expenses, while the Superior Court stipulates that appointed counsel county picks up the expert witness, shall be awarded reasonable investigator, and transcript costs. Civil Division. compensation. Although there are no established Family Division- In some jurisdictions, conflict cases lim its, the county a ttorney monitors Jurisdiction over actions of divorce, are handled by private attorneys on a the expenses. support, custody, adoption, pater­ fixed salary. nity, delinquency and neglect, Payment of these expenses may be CHINS, and mental commitments. There is a lump sum in the county subject to the prior approval of the budget for contractual services, and county attorney. Tax Division. out of the budget the county attor­ ney decides how many attorneys and In other counties, an attorney cannot Probate Division. at what salary they will do assigned spend more than a specified amount counsel work. (e.g., $250) on expenses without prior Criminal Division. court order. Annual salaries may range from Exclusive jurisdiction over any $10,000 to $25,000. criminal (including traffic) case, no jurisdiction over Federal crimes. Other counties contract with one attorney to do all assigned counsel Courts of limited or special work. jurisdiction:

The salary is determined through None. negotiation between the attorney and the county attorney. Municipal courts:

Hourly rate: None. In other counties with an ad hoc assigned counsel system, rates are

64 National Criminal Defense Systems Study S#

Magistrates: Assigned counsel ra tes Florida Superior Court Hearing Rates set by sta tute. Counties selected for survey: Commissioner 1. P innellas 9. Leon D.C. Code Ann. Sec. 11-2604 et. seq 2. Hillsborough 10. Alachua Primarily responsible for conducting stipulates that an "attorney shall be 3. Dade 11. Manatee hearings in mental retardation compensated at a rate fixed by the 4. Broward 12. Lee proceedings, but not necessarily Joint JUdicial Administration, not to 5. Palm Beach 13. Polk limited to this area. exceed the hourly scale of 18 U.S.C. 6. Duval 14. Clay 3006A (d)(l)" (same as below). 7. Orange 15. Seminole Makes recommendation in writing as 8. Escambia 16. Brevard to appropriate disposition by In addition, the statute sets the Superior Court. maximum limits reported below. Court of last resort:

Defense services to indigents Hourly rates: Florida Supreme Court Out-of-eourt $20 Statutory scheme In-eourt $30 May issue all extraordinary writs.

There is established in the District Maximums: Has jurisdiction over criminal and of Columbia a citywide Public civil appeals and petitions for writs Defender Service (PDS). A lawyer may not receive more than of certiorari from District Court of $42,000 per year in assigned counsel Appeals, Circuit Court, County Public defenders is governed by a fees. Court, agencies, and commissions. board of trustees appointed by a panel presided over by the chief All case limits may be waived by Court reviews constitutional judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals chief judge of superior court. questions, capital cases in which (D.C. Circuit). death penalty was imposed, bond Capital case validations, and cases of public PDS is also charged with establishing Felony $1,000 interest. and coordinating a system for Misdemeanor $400 appointment of private attorneys. Other Intermediate appellate courts:

Statute: D.C. Code Ann. Sec. 22- Appeals: District Court of Appeal 2222 et. seq. Out-o f-eourt In-eourt May issue all writs necessary to Actual system Maximum $1,000 complete exercise ofits jurisdiction.

PDS represents approximately 20% Flat rate or per diem: Jurisdiction to hear appeals taken as of indigent defendants and these a matter of right over all criminal include the more serious felony None. and civil cases from Circuit Courts, cases. agencies, and commissions, except in Expense limits: matter!') directly appealable to Public defenders work closely with Supreme Court. assigned counsel providing some Each case has a $300 limit unless support services such as library, authorized by presiding judge. District Court is court of final investigators, and social workers. appellate jurisdiction, except for a narrow classification of cases made Costs reviewable by the Florida Supreme Court. All funds for the provision of defense services to the indigent in the Court of general trial jurisdiction: District of Columbia are provided by the District of Columbia Circuit Court government. Twenty judicial Districts made up of Total costs by source: one to seven counties each. State County $8,291,000 Exclusive original jurisdiction in: Other o all actions not triable by County Total $8,291,000 Court o all probate matters iii juvenile matters G all criminal cases.

National Criminal Defense Systelns Study 65 Appendix C

4 T Pi

Has appellate jurisdiction over Costs Appeals (hourly rates): matters from County Court, except when they are directly appealable to The State provides the majority of Established by circuit. Florida Supreme Court. indigent defense expenditures in Out-of-court Florida. By statute the county is In-court Courts of limited or special required to pay for the cost of Maximum $1,000 jurisdiction: priva te assigned counsel and for some overhead items, such as office Flat rate or per diem: County Court space, utilities, telephone, and custodial services. None. One in each county. During the present fiscal year (1983), Expense limits: Presently three divisions: Civil, for 'the first time, the State began to Criminal, and Traffic. share the cost of private court­ None. appointed attorneys. Original jurisdiction in all Under Florida statute expenses are misdemeanors not triable by the Total costs by source: allowed when reasonably incurred, Circuit Court, and all county and State $28,499,973 including the costs of transcripts municipal ordinance cases. County $9,680,323 authorized by the court. Other Municipal Courts: Total $38,180,296

None. Assigned counsel rates

Magistrates: Rates set by statute, custom in jurisdiction, and judge discretion. None. By statute in Florida (Fla. Stat. Ann. Defense services to indigents Sec. 925.036) appointed counsel are to be compensated at an hourly rate Statutory scheme fixed by the chief or senior judge of each judicial circuit, in an amount By statute, each of Florida's 20 not to excee(] the prevailing rate. judicial districts is required to establish a public defender program. Maximum limits for compensation are set by the statute, as reported All such public defenders are below. publically elected to a 4-year term at the State's general election. Hourly rates: Appellate representation is provided Varies among the circuits. by several of these public defender programs on a regional basis. Note that the hourly rate is fixed by the Chief or Senior Judge of the cir­ Members of the private bar are cuit while actual fees and expenses appointed when necessary, because are determined and awarded by the of either a conflict of interest trial judge. among co-defendl1nts or when the public defender is not available. Sample fees range from $20/25 an hour to $50/65 an hour. Statute: Fla. Stat. Ann. Sec. 27.50 et. seq. Maximums: Capital case $2,500 Actual system (at trial) Felony $1,500- All 20 judicial circuits have a (life) $2,000 popularly elected public defender. :\1isdemeanor $1,000 Other $1,000 Appointments to the private bar in (juvenile) conflict cases and case overload are made by the individual judges.

66 National Criminal Defrnse Systems Study ------1

Wt* '" . § # Georgia Courts of limited or special Municipal Court jurisdiction: o only in Columbus and Savannah­ Counties selected for survey: countywide jurisdiction 1. Fulton 10. Crawford Probate Court o limited criminal jurisdiction in '2. De Kalb 11. Gwinnett misdemeanor cases. 3. Cobb 12. Jones Has exclusive probate jurisdiction. 4. Chattooga 13. Tift Magistra te Court 5. Columbus 14. Oconee Has criminal jurisdiction over misde­ 6. Randolph 15. Washington meanor violations of Georgia Sta te In four counties (Baldwin, Rockdale, 7. Whitfield 16. Columbia Highway Patrol Act of 1979, if there Clarke, and Glynn) 8. Clayton 17. Appling is no State or County Court in the o criminal jurisdiction over minor 9. Dougherty 18. Chatham county. criminal cases-similar to Justice of Peace Courts Court of last resort: Can hear habeas corpus, except in o Clark City MUnicipal Court also extradition cases. hears traffic cases Georgia Supreme Court o also hears county ordinance cases. Juvenile Court Has no original jurisdiction. Recorders Court, Mayors Court, City Established in all counties with more Council Court, Police Court, Munici­ Appellate jUrisdiction encompasses than 50,000 population or where 2 pal Court the trial and correction of errors of successive grand juries recommend law in all questions involving creation (now in 55 of 159 counties); City charters created 338 courts. construction of U.S. and Georgia, for remaining counties, Superior etc., constitutions. Court judge sits as juvenile judge. Covers municipality.

Also includes review of habeas Handles all juvenile matters. Original jurisdiction 'in municipal corpus and other extraordinary writs. ordinances, including traffic. State Court Has review of all capital cases. Wave powers of Justice of Peace. Countywide jurisdiction concurrent Has review of cases certified to with Superior Court in counties with Magistrates: Supreme Court by Court of Appeals. more than 10,000 population. Superior Court Master Intermediate appellate courts: County Court (Baldwin, Echols, and Putnam Counties). Juvenile Court Referee and Traffic Court of Appeals Referee Criminal jurisdiction in misdemeanor Has no original jurisdiction. cases. Juvenile Court may appoint one or more to serve. Has appellate jurisdiction over cases Civil Court (Biff and Richmond heard in the Superior Courts, certain Counties). Judge may direct all delinquency State and City Courts, and juvenile cases to be heard in first instance by courts when exclusive jurisdiction Jurisdiction same as Justice of referee. has not been vested in the Supreme Peace Court-can issue warrants and Court. serve as commital court in felonies Cobb County Magistra te and misdemeanors. Court of general trial jurisdiction: May issue warrants, conduct Municipal courts: commitments, and set bail. Superior Court Justice of Peace Court Recorders Court There are 42 circuits of 1 to 8 Magistrate of DeKalb County counties each. Created in all militia districts­ presently 1,531 Justices of Peace. May issue warrants, hold commital Has exclusive original jurisdiction in hearings, and set bail. criminal cases where offender is sub­ Criminal jurisdiction to issue jected to loss of life or confinement warrants, hold commitment hearings, Defense services to indigents in penitentiary, except in juvenile and act as conservators of the peace. cases. Statutory scheme Small Claims Court Has appellate jurisdiction in certain By statute, the Superior Court of a civil cases from County Court, Pro­ county, with the approval of the bate Court, and Justice of Peace county government, may establisi1 a Court. public defender office.

National Cdminal Defense Systems Study 67 Appendix C

Ltg a: \4*

The Superior Court of the county These figures represent the ranges of Hawaii appoints the public defender for a maximums report by the counties term of 2 years. surveyed: All four counties contacted for Capital case survey. Those counties not establishing a Felony $400- public defender program provide 1,000 Court of last resort: representation either through an Misdemeanor $200- assigned counsel program or through 500 Hawaii Supl'eme Court a contract with members of the Other priva te bar. Has power to exercise original juris­ Appeals: diction in all questions arising under Statute: Ga. Code Ann. Sec. 27- writs directed to courts of limited 3203 et. seq. None. jurisdiction, and in other such matters. Actual system Flat rate or per diem: Appellate jurisdiction: The majority of Georgia's 159 Some counties pay on a flat rate o hears and determines all questions counties are served by assigned basis. These figures are repre­ of law, or of mixed law and fact, counsel programs. sentative of the rates reported by which are properly brought Defore it the surveyed counties: on any appeal allowed by law from A few are served by public defenders Felony $200 any other court or a judge and a few by contract programs. Misdemeanor $50- Q in its discretion, court may hear 100 any question of law reserved by a Appeal Circuit Court, and other courts Other (I entertains, in its discretion, any All expenditures for the provision of case submitted without suit when indigent defense services in Georgia Expense limits: there is a question that might be­ are the responsibilities of the come a proceeding, and the parties individual county. Counties may cover expenses agree on the facts in controversy. "necessarily incurred on a Total costs by source: discretionary basis." Intermediate appellate court: State County $5,672,712 Intermediate Court of Appeals Other Total $5,672,712 Concurrent jurisdiction with the Supreme Court. Assigned counsel rates Assignment of cases based on Rates set by custom in jurisdiction following criteria: and judge discretion. (I whether case involves a question of first impression or presents a novel The counties establish rates legal question according to the judge's discretion, • whether case involves question of pursuant to Ga-Code Ann. Sec. 27- State or Federal constitutional law 3204(a). o whether case involves a question of State statute, county ordinance, or Hourly rate: agency regulation o whether there are inconsistent These figures represent the ranges of decisions between Court of Appeals hourly rates reported by the counties and Supreme Court surveyed: I') whether case involves a sentence Out-of-court $15-30 of life imprisonment without In-court $20-35 parole. Cases involving these questions may be retained by the Maximums: Supreme Court. Appeals of Intermediate Court decision are by Local programs gen':!rally set the certioriari to Supreme Court. maximum levels, although some do not. Court of general trial jurisdiction:

Circuit Court Trial court of general jurisdiction.

68 National Climina/ Drj'ense Systems Study t! ;g """ s ; i Exclusive jurisdiction in felony Actual system Idaho cases. Each of Hawaii's four counties is Coun ties selected for survey: F'amily division hears juvenile and served by a regional officI;! of the 1. Canyon 8. Gem family matters. Hawaii State Public Defender. 2. Ada 9. Shoshone 3. Kootenai 10. Twin Falls Appellate jurisdiction over inferior 4. Bannock 11. Jerome courts. 5. Bonneville 12. Bingham All costs of providing defense 6. Latah 13. Cassia Land Court services to the indigent in Hawaii 7,. Lewis 14. Bear Lake are provided by the State. Tax Appeals Court Court of last resort: Total costs by source: Courts of limited or special State $3,500,000 Idaho Supreme Court jurisdiction: County Other Has original jurisdiction to hear District Court Total $3,500,000 'claims against the State and to issue all writs necessary to complete the Conducts preliminary hearings in Assigned counsel rates exercise of its appellate jUrisdiction. felony cases. Rates set by statute, custom in Since creation of Intermediate Court Has jurisdiction over all criminal jurisdiction, and judge discretion. of Appeals, Supreme Court hears offenses punishable by a fine or appeals from its final decision. imprisonment of less than 1 year. Hawaii Rev. Stat. Sec. 611-5(b) stipulates that the fee schedule for Intermediate appellate court: Has jurisdiction over ordinance assigned counsel shall not be more violations. than or less than the prescribed Intermediate Court of Appeals ranges, as reported below. (created 7/1/81) Municipal courts: Hourly rate: Has been given jurisdiction to hear None. and decide all cases assigned to it by None. the Supreme Court, provided that Magistra tes: the Supreme Court does not assign Attorneys submit bills at whatever cases invoking its original juris­ District Court Per Diem Judge rate they deem reasonable. The bills diction or appeals from imposition of are then reviewed by the sitting death penalty. Appointed by Chief Justice. judge. Supreme Court may transfer un­ Provides auxiliary judicial functions. Maximums: argued cases before it to Inter­ Capital case * $1,500 max. mediate Court of Appeals, and Court Defense services to irnJigents $250 min. of Appeals may transfer cases back. Felony $750 max. Statutory scheme $50 min. Right of appeal is not created where Misdemeanor $300 max. such right is not established by law. By statute, Hawaii has a statewide $50 min. public defender system, which Other $300 max. Subsequent legislation or court rule handles all indigent defense cases, $50 min. may alter Court of Appeals role. with the exception of conflict cases. *There are no capital cases in Court of general trial jurisdiction: The Governor appoints the defender Hawaii, but this fee is for cases council of five members to admin­ where the penalty could exceed 20 District Court ister the statewide program. years. Has original jurisdiction in all cases The State public defender is ap­ Appeals: and proceedings. pointed by the defender council to a term of 4 years. None. Has power to issue all writs necessary for the exercise of its Members of the private bar are Flat rate or per diem: powers. appointed where necessary in con­ None. flict cases and where the public Has appellate jurisdiction over all defender is not available. cases assigned to Magistrate Division Expense limits: of the District Court. Statute: Hawaii Rev. Stat. Sec. 46, Expenses must be authorized in 802 et. seq. advance by the judge.

National Oiminal Defense Systems Study 69 Appendix C

Court of limited or special Costs Maximums: jurisdiction: Indigent defense services in Idaho None. None. are funded exclusively by the coun­ ties. In most counties the sitting judge Municipal courts: determines what is reasonable. Total costs by source: None. State Appeals: County $1,833,935 Magistrates: Other Same as above. Total $1,833,935 Magistrate Division of District Court Flat rate or per diem: Assigned counsel ra tes Subject to rules promulgated by the None. Supreme Court, the administrative Rates set by custom in jurisdiction judge of each judicial district and judge discretion. Expense limits: determines which cases are assigned to Magistrate Division. Idaho Gen. Stat. Sec. 19-860 states No limits reported. that any attorney other than a public May hear misdemeanor and quasi­ defender assigned to represent a Idaho Gen. Sta t. Sec. 19-860 provides criminal cases, issue warrants, etc. needy person should be paid a that the court shall determine the reasonable rate of compensation direct expenses necessary for repre­ May hear juvenile proceedings as prescribed by the court. sentation following the appointment established by statute. of counsel. This rate will be determined with Defense services to indigents regard to the complexity of the issues, time involved, and other Statutory scheme relevan t considera tions.

Idaho Gen. Stats. Sec. 19-859 The actual methods of appointing authorizes the Board of County counsel in conflict cases and Commissioners to provide for the providing compensation for their representation of indigents in one of services vary widely across the Sta te three ways: as indicated in the following examples: 1. By establishing and maintaining an E) the firm contracting with the Office of the Public Defender either county to provide indigent defense singly or in conjunction with one or services pays two other firms a more other counties; monthly retainer of $750 each for the handling of conflict cases 2. By arranging with the courts of " counsel are appointed by the court criminal jurisdiction to assign in conflict cases and are paid on an attorneys through a systematic, hourly basis coordinated plan; or o the public defender office contracts with another firm to 3. By adopting some combination of handle conflicts at the rate of $30 an 1 and 2 above. hour with a $10,000 a year ceiling G court-appointed counsel are chosen Statute: Idaho Code Sec. 19-851 et. from a rotating list. Attorneys are seq. paid a flat rate (e.g., $35 an hour) " county contracts with a law firm Actual system to provide defense for indigents and pays them on an hourly basis at a At the time of this survey there specified rate (e.g., $35 an hour) were 14 counties served by public defenders in Idaho. Hourly r&te: Out-of-court $30- Contract programs existed in most $35 of the remaining 30 counties, along In-court $30- with a small number of assigned $45 counsel programs. These figures represent a range of typical hourly rates.

70 National Crimina/ Defense Systems Study illinois ~icipal courts: Maximums: Capital case $2,000 Coun ties selected for survey: None. Felony $1,000 1. Cook 10. Christian Misdemeanor $750 2. Lake 11. Macon Magistrates: Other 3. Du Page 12. La Salle 4. Adams 13. Kane None. Appeals: 5. St. Clair 14. ~.1cLean Out-of-court $30 6. Jackson 15. Champaign Defense services to indigents In-court $30 7. Warren 16. Will Maximum $1,500 8. Winnebago 17. Vermillion statutory scheme 9. Peoria Flat rate or per diem: By statute, counties with a popu­ Court of last resort: lation of 35,000 or more are required None. to create public defender programs. Supreme Court Expense limits: For counties with a population of Discretionary original jurisdiction less than 35,000, the county board Generally set by statute, however in over cases relating to revenue and may choose either a public defender practice, expenditures exceeding extraordinary writs, and other or assigned counsel program. these limits are routinely approved. matters. statute: ill. Ann. Stat. Ch. 34 Sec. Investiga tors $250 Appellate jurisdiction over appeals 5601 et. seq. Expert witnesses $25!J from death penalty, and over cases (capital cases) from Appellate Court raising Actual system Transcripts $250 constitutional questions. Social Services $250 All counties in illinois above 35,000 Travel Certiorari jurisdiction over other have a public defender program. Total $1,000 appeals from Appellate Court. Those counties below 35,000 are Intermediate appellate court: predominately assigned counsel.

Appellate Court Costs

Has original jurisdiction to complete The state funds a statewide determination of any case on review. fl.ppellate defender program.

Hears appeals from final judgments All other costs are the responsibility from Circuit Courts, except in cases of the counties. directly appealable to Supreme Court. Total costs by source: state $ 3,000,000* Can provide direct review of admin­ County $22,057,917 istrative actions as provided by law. Other $ 152,395 Total $25,210,312 Court of general trial jurisdiction: *Full amount of State contribution is Circuit Court funding for State appellate program.

Original jurisdiction over all Assigned counsel rates justiciable matters except where Supreme Court has original and Rates set by statute and judge exclusive jurisdiction. discretion. Original jurisdiction to review ill. Ann. Stat. ch. 38, Sec. 113-3 administrative actions as provided by stipulates that the court shall law. determine a reasonable fee not to exceed the specified hourly and Courts of limited or special maximum limits reported below. jurisdiction: Hourly rate: None. Out-of court $30 In-court $30

Nadonal Cn'milzal Difense Systems Study 71 Appendix C

Indiana Superior Court Magistrates: Counties selected for survey: Thirteen Superior Courts have Masters (all trial courts) 1. Lake 10. Marshall concurrent jurisdiction with the 2. Marion 11. Elkhart Circuit Court. Handles cases referred by individual 3. Allen 12. Howard courts. 4. Knox 13. Washington Fourteen have concurrent juris­ 5. Warrick 14. Bartholomew diction in all but pI'obate and Probate Com missioner 6. Greene 15. Grant juvenile matters. 7. La Porte 16. Delaware Circuit Court, Superior Court, and 8. Putnam 17. Switzerland Six have exclusive jurisdiction over Municipal Court of Marion County 9. Monroe juvenile and probate, and concurrent Master Commissioner jurisdiction with Circuit Court in all Court of last resort: other cases. Among other duties, can certify affidavits and depositions, Indiana Supreme Court Several other courts have varying administer oaths and affirmations, arrangements. issue and enforce subpoenas, issue May issue any writs necessary to arrest warrants and set bail thereon, exercise its appellate jurisdiction. Courts of limited or special and conduct preliminary hearings. jurisdiction Appellate jurisdiction over all cases Defense services to indigents that it may restrict by court rule. County Court Statutory scheme Only appeals that may be taken Has original and concurl'ent juris­ directly to Supreme Court are those diction in all Class D felony, By statute for counties of 400,000 or criminal cases where penalty of misdemeanor, infraction, and more, a criminal court judge may death or a sentence of 10 years or ordinance violation cases. appoint one or more public defenders more is imposed. as necessary for the defense of Can also set bail in other criminal indigents. In all criminal appeals, the court cases. may review any question of law and For counties with a population of review and revise the sentence Probate Court (St. Joseph) less than 400,000, judges of courts of imposed by the Trial Court. criminal jurisdiction are authorized Exclusive probate jurisdiction in St. to contract with any attorney or Intermediate appell~te court: Joseph. group of attorneys.

Court of Appeals Municipal courts: Statute: Ind. Code Ann. Sec. 33-9.

Has no original jurisdiction. Municipal Court of Marion County Actual system

Supreme Court rules 'specify Same jurisdiction as County Court. At the time of the survey, 44 conditions under which Court of counties were served by public Appeals may hear appeals: Small Claims Court of Marion defenders, 44 by assigned counsel, (I an appeal as a matter of right must County and 4 by a contract system. be available in all cases, including review of sentences in criminal cases City Court- In Indiana, programs defined as (I except in criminal cases where public defenders inclUde courts penalty is death or sentence exceeds Criminal jurisdiction in misde­ where individual judges appoint one 10 years, or appeal is directly to meanors where there is a fine of less private attorney to handle all but Supreme Court, the Appeal of Right than $500 and a sentence less than 6 conflict cases and for which there is is to the Court of Appeals months. no centrally administered program. o the court also is empowered to hear interlocutory appeals. Also has jurisdiction over city ("osts ordinance violations. Courts of general trial jurisdiction: The State funds a State appellate Town Court- program. Circuit Court Same jurisdiction as City Court. All other costs in Indiana are Statewide jurisdiction is not uniform. contributed by the counties.

Exercises jurisdiction in all cases, Total costs by source: but in certain counties that juris­ State $793,286* diction is concurrent with the County $4,758,144 Superior Court.

72 NatiOI'al Criminal Defense Systems Study ------~

• -4 e ! q: '9 J

Other Iowa FUll-time Judicial Magistrates: Total $5,551,430 Have concurrent jurisdiction with Counties selected for survey: Associate District Judge. *Full amount of Sta te contribution is 1. Polk 10. Wapello funding for state appellate program. 2. Linn 11. Howard Part-time Judicial Magistrates: 3. Woodbury 12. Black Hawk Empowered to hear preliminary Assigned counsel rates 4. Mills 13. WaShington hearings, nonindictable misde­ 5. Dickinson 14. Winneshiek meanors and traffic cases, ordinance Rates set by custom in jurisdiction 6. Calhoun 15. Des Moines violations, and issue search warrants and judge discretion. 7. Dallas 16. Scott and emergency hospitalization 8. Story 17. Dubuque hearings. The state statute (Ind. Code Ann. 9. Hardin Sec. 33-9-10-2) provides that the Courts of limited or special judge of any court having criminal Court of last resort: jurisdictions: jurisdiction shall establish the fee to be paid to attorneys representing Iowa Supreme Court None. indigent defendants. May issue all necessary writs to Municipal courts: Hourly rate: conduct the business of the court. None. These figures represent the most Has appellate jurisdiction only in commonly reported rates in the cases of chancery and constitutes a Magistrates: counties surveyed: court for correction of errors of law. Out-of-COUrt $300 District judge hearing juvenile cases In-court $ 50 Intermediate appellate court: may appoint referee.

Maximums: Court of Appeals Referees empowered to hear juvenile Capital case None procp.edings in first instance. Felony None May issue writs and other processes Misdemeanor None necessary for exercise and enforce­ May make findings of fact and issue Other None ment of its jurisdiction. recommendations to court.

Supreme Court has set the following Has appellate jurisdiction only in Parties entitled to rehearing before minimum rates, which have been cases in chancery. judge within 7 days of filing of adopted in several counties. referees' report. Has subject matter jurisdiction in all Murder $2,500 criminal and postconviction cases. DeCense services to indigents Class A felony $1,500 Class B felony $1,000 Jurisdiction is limited to those Statutory scheme Class C felony $750 matters for which an appeal has been Class D felony $500 brought before the Supreme Court Chapter 336A of the Iowa General Class A misdemeanor $350 and for which the Supreme Court has Statutes gives the county Board of Class Blc misdemeanor $250 entered an order transferring the Supervisors the authori~y to establish Dea th penalty adds $1,000 matter to t'le Court of Appeals. an office of the public defender. Appeals (hourly rate): Court of general trial jurisdiction: Contiguous counties have the author­ ity to establish a joint office. Minimum $1,500 District Court Oral argument $500 In addition, judges have the authority Petition for rehearing $500 A unified trial court. to appoint members of the private Petition for transfer bar. to Supreme Court $400 Has original and general jurisdiction over all actions. Statute: Iowa Gen. Stat. Chs. 336A Flat rate or per diem: and 336B. Jury trial $300/day Jurisdiction divided between various types of judicial offices: Actual system Expense limits: District Judges: At the time of the survey, 15 None. Full and complete jurisdiction. counties were served by a public defender and the remaining 84 by an All expenses within discretion of District Associate Judges: assigned f!ounsel program. trial court. Part-time magistrates hear indictaple misdemeanors and assigned juvenile matters.

National Climillal Deftnse Systems Study 73 Appendix C

... , !F ,.¥ I

Costs I.G.S. Sec. 815.5 requires that Kansas expert witnesses be paid "reason­ The state of Iowa funds a state able compensation" as defined by Counties selected for survey: appellate defender program. the courts. 1. Shawnee 10. Butler 2. Johnson 11. Riley All other costs are contributed by Investigative services and tran­ 3. Wyandotte 12. Elk the individual counties. scripts are provided for in Sec. 4. Sedgwick 13. Lyon 815.7 as part of costs billable by 5. Haskell 14. Allen Total costs by source: appointed counsel. 6. Ellis 15. Crawford State $267,208* 7. Barber 16. Douglas County $6,119,848 Public Defenders are also author­ 8. Lincoln 17. Leavenworth Other ized to provide investigative 9. McPherson Total $6,387,056 services per I.G.S. Sec. 336A.5. Court of last resort: *Full amount of State contribution is for State appellate program. Kansas Supreme Court Assigned counsel rates Has original jurisdiction to issue extraordinary writs. Rates set by custom in jurisdiction and judge discretion. Any decision of Court of Appeals may be reviewed by Supreme Court I.G.S. Sec. 815.7 entitles court­ in its discretion. appointed counsel to reasonable compensation for their services, Decisions of Court of Appeals, which including costs of investigation and raise constitutional issues for first transcripts. time, are reviewable as a matter of right. Vouchers are reviewed in some cases by the sitting judge, in other cases Transfer of cases from Court of by a gr'oup of district judges sitting Appeals is authorized when case does together. not fall within Court of Appeals jurisdiction, or subject matter is of Though it is reported that most areas public interest, or case load of Court of the State follow the rough of Appeals requires it. guidelines below, fees paid in urban areas are likely to be higher than Direct Appeal to Supreme Court in those paid in rural areas. criminal cases from District Court in Class A or B felony cases, or where Hourly rate: life sentence imposed.

No distinction reported between in­ Prosecution may directly appeal any court and out-of-court costs. order dismissing charges or arresting Out-of-court $35-40 judgment. In-court $35-40 Intermediate appellate court: Maximums:

None. Court of Appeals Jurisdiction to correct, modify, Appeals: vacate, or revise any act, order, or None. judgment of a District Court.

Flat rate or per diem: In criminal cases, an appeal may be taken by the defendant as a matter None. of right from any judgment of District Court, except in cases of a Expense limits: guilty plea or a plea of nolo contendre, unless taken on No apparent limits. jurisdictional or other grounds involving the legality ~f the proceedings.

74 National Cn"minal Defense SystelllS Stud,,v All provisional remedies, injunctions, counties a system of appointed Maximums: writs, and other questions of law counsel, a system of contracts with Capital case $250 may be appealed to Court of the private bar, a public defender, or with guil ty plea Appeals. a combination thereof, on a full-time Capital case $759 or part-time basi~. without guilty plea Court of general trial jurisdiction: Felony Statute: L1982, Ch. 142 Misdemeanor District Court Other Actual system General original jurisdiction in all Compensation in excess of these civil and criminal cases. Public Defender Offices are located maximums may be approved only in in the 3rd, 8th, and 28th judicial exceptional cases, which arc defined Three classes of judges: district with a district public as defender in each office responsible o cases involving a Class A or Class District Judge­ for the operations of that office. B felony charge Full judicial power. o cases tried on a not-guilty plea All other counties operate an with 25 hours or more of in-coUl't Associate District Judge­ assigned counsel program. time Concurrent jurisdiction with District o cases with a guilty or nolo Judge, except in class actions, etc. Costs contendere plea with 10 hours or more of in-court time. District Magistrate Judge- All costs of felony representation Can conduct trials in misdemeanor are provided through State funds. A total of no more than $9,000 may cases and hear preliminary he paid in anyone case. examinations in felony cases. All other costs are the responsibility of the counties. Appeals (hourly rate): Has appellate jurisdiction as prescribed by law. Total costs by source: Out-of court $20 o de novo over District Magistrate State $2,595,032 In-court $20 judg2 County $916,961 Maximum $100 e over municipal court cases. Other in court Total $3,511,993 Courts of limited or special Flat rate or per diem: jurisdiction: Assigned counsel ra tes Felony See Municipal Courts. Kan. Stat. Ann. statute Sec. 22-4501 Misdemeanor et. seq. creates a board of Appeal $150 (oral Municipal courts: supervisors that shall consist of a argument in justice of the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court) Municipal Court judicial administrator, two district Other judges, and five practicing attorneys. Has jurisdiction to hear and Expense limits: determine cases involving city This statewide board of supervisors ordinances and trials without juries. establishes the assignl:!d counsel fee Any claim in excess of $300 for rates, although the rates are subject expenses for investigative, expert, or May issue search warr,'wts. to legislative appropriations. other services necessary to an adequate defense is subject to Magistrates: Hourly rates: further review and approval by the board of supervisors. None. The board of supervisors had recommended new increased rates Expenses must be approved in Defense services to indigents for FY 1981 ($35/hour in-court and advance by court order, which also $25 out-of-court), which went into establishes a maximum limitation as Statutol'y scheme effect in July 1980. to the costs of those services. Investigators $300 By statute in Kansas, the State The legislature had approved these Expert witness $300 Board of Indigent Defense Services new rates, but after seeing the ($30/hr) was established in 1982 within the increased costs involved, told the Transcripts $1.50/page executive branch of state board to return to the FY 1980 rates. Social Services government. Out-of court $20 Travel In-court $30 Total The board is authorized to establish in each county or combination of

National Criminal Defonse Systems Study 75 Appendix C

G d m 7 .. rr'CP &.'# B j k ;"1

Kentucky Court of general trial jurisdiction: May issue temporary orders for involuntary hospitalization for Counties selected for survey: Circuit Court mentally ill, not to exceed 7 days. 1. Jefferson 10. Pl'anklin 2. Payette 11. Kenton Has original jurisdiction in any Defense services to indigents 3. McCracken 12. Pulaski justiciable cause not exclusively 4. Caldwell 13. Madison vested in some other court. statutory scheme 5. Henderson 14. Bath 6. Warren 15. Bell Has appellate jurisdiction over By statute, the Office for Public 7. Hardin t6. Perry District Court decisions. Advocacy has been crea ted in 8. Bulli tt 17. Boyd Kentucky to provide for the 9. Taylor 18. Pike Courts of limited or special establishment, maintenance, and jurisdiction: operation of a State-sponsored and Court of last resort: -controlled system for the defense of District Court indigent persons. Kentucky Supreme Court Has exclusive jurisdiction (;ver any Under this systefi1, Jefferson County Has no original jurisdiction other misdemeanor or violation, except must establish a public defender than power to, issue all writs when such charge is joined with a system, while all other counties may necessary in the aid of its appellate felony indictment. choose a public defend!?r, assigned jurisdiction or the complete deter­ counsel, or contract system. mination of any cause, or as may be Has concurrent jurisdiction with required to control the entire court Circuit Court to conduct preliminal') Under this system, State funds are system. examinations in felony cases. funnelled to the local programs through the Office of Public Constitution provides that appeals Court may accept pleas to misde­ Advocacy. from Circuit Court judgments meanors that are reduced from imposing a senten~e of death or felony charges. statutue: Ky. Rev. Stat. Sec. imprisonment for 20 years or more 31.010 et. seq. be appealed directly to Supreme All cases relating to minors are Court. within exclusive jurisdiction of Actual system District Court. Remainder of appellate jurisdiction Public defender programs operate in established by Court Rules. Municipfll courts: slightly less than 50% of the counties in Kentucky. Intermediate appellate courts: None. The balance of the remaining coun­ Court of Appeals Magistra tes: ties are split between assigned counsel and contract programs, May issue all writs necessary in aid Circuit Court Commissioner of its appellate jurisdiction. Costs Duties as delegated by Circuit Constitution specifies that appellate Court. Most of the funds for operation of jurisdiction shall be provided by law. the indigent defense system in District Court Tt'ial Commissioner Kentucky are contributed by the An appeal may be taken as a matter State. of right from any conviction, final Duties prescribed by Supreme Court. judgment, order. or decree of the Some counties also make a contri­ Circuit Court, unless such actions May issue arrest l'Ind search bution, but many more do not. were rendered on an appeal from the warrants, District Court, Total costs by source: May set bail. State $4,516,700 An appeal may be taken by the State County $539,052 in criminal cases from an adverse Can accept guilty pJeas in offenses other $114,000 decision as specified by statute and carrling fine of not more than $500, Total $5,169,752 court rule. and may impose fine. Assigned counsel rates In juvenile cases: g makes 1!ustody and detention Rates set by ~tatutc, custom in determinations jurisdiction, and judgc discretion. 4) conducts preliminary inquiries "" orders physical and mental exams Ky. Rev. Sta. Sec. 31.070 stipulates o in emergency cases, issues that the circuit court judge shall temporary custody orders. determinp all necessary fees.

76 National Crim;nal Defense Systems Study ...... The statute also establishes the Louisiana Has exclusive original jurisdiction in limits on compensation reported felony cases. below. Parishes selected for survey: Orleans Parish divided into Criminal Hourly rates: 1. E. Baton Rouge 9. Lafayette District Court and Civil District out-of-court $25 2. Jefferson 10. La Salle Court. In-court $35 3. Orleans 11. Quachita 4. Caddo 12. Iberia Some appeals from inferior courts Maximums: 5. Vernon 13. rrerrebonne are heard, but juvenile court and Capital case $2,500 6. Calcasieu 14. La Fourche family court excluded. Felony $1,250 7. Natchitochas 15. Tangipaho'l Misdemeanor $500 8. Grant 16. Washington Criminal District Court of Orleans Other Parish hears appeals of misdemeanor Court of last resort: cases from New Orleans Municipal Appeals: Court and Traffic Court. Out-of-court $25 Louisiana Supreme Court In-court $25 Courts of limited or special Maximum $750 Cases are directly appealable to jurisdiction: Supreme Court if a law or ordinance Flat rate or per diem: has been declared unconstitutional, City Court or if a defendant has been convicted None. of a felony, or if a fine exceeding Jurisdiction limited to those offenses $500 or imprisonment exceeding 6 that are not punishable by imprison­ Expense limits: months has actually been imposed. ment, including ordinance violations.

None. In criminal matters, the court's juris­ May issue peace bonds, arrest diction extends only to questions of warrants, set bail, and hold preli­ Expenses are allowed on a law. minary examinations in all non­ discretionary basis by the individual capital cases. judge. Further review by the Court is in its discretion. Parish Court

Each justice has power to issue Has concurrent criminal jurisdiction extraordinary writs, subject to with District Court over ordinance review by full court. violations Bnd offenses, but only those not punishable by imprison­ Intermediate Court of Appeals may ment at hard labor. certify any question of lew before it goes to the Supreme Court. Family ("'ourt Intermediate appellate court: Has original jurisdiction over all cases involving domestic relations, Court of Appeals including child support, custody by habeas corpus, visitation, etc. May issue all extraordinary writs. Also has Same jurisdiction as Has appellate jurisdiction over all Juvenile Court. civil, juvenile, and family court cases, except criminal prosecutions Juvenile Court involving juveniles. Exclusive original jurisdiction in In general, cO'Jrt's jurisdiction o CHINS extends to law and facts. o delinquency o certain felonies that may be Has no jurisdiction in criminal cases. transferred to adult court, after waiver by Juvenile Court Court of general trial jurisdiction: o URESA cases.

District Court

Has original jurisdiction in all criminal and civil matters.

Nah'onal Criminal Dftfonse Systems StudY 77 AppendixC

w .. 'Mi

Municipal court: Criminal District Court of Orleans Costs Parish Magistrate Municipal Court of New Orleans There is created within each judicial Acts as commiting magistrate in district an indigent defender fund, Jurisdiction over all ordinance felony and misdemeanor charges. which consists of a tax on special violations except those involving costs by every court of original traffic matters. Hears preliminary examinations. jurisdiction in the State at a rate of between $4.50 and $10.00 for each Also has concurrent jllrisdiction with May set bail. misdemeanor or muniCipal ordinance Criminal District Court over vio­ violation other than a parking lations of state statutes that do not May hear preliminary motions, violation. involve traffic matters. accept pleas in misdemeanors, and conduct trials in misdemeanor cases. The exact rate is established by a Maximum allowed penalty is a $300 majority vote of the judges. fine and/or 5 months in jail. May issue search and arrest warrants. There is an additional charge of Traffic Court of New Orlean.~ $10.00 for each felony case involving Criminal District Court of Orleans a guilty plea or conviction. Jurisdiction over all traffic Parish Commissioner violations, except where trial by This fund is available on an annual jury is allowed. Primary role to assist the basis to the local program. magistrate. Mayors Court No other funds are made available in Has same powers and duties as Louisiana. All Mayors have power of a magistrate. Commiting Magistrate. Total costs by source: Mayor's Court Magistrate State Jurisdiction over all municipal County $5,925,256 ordinance violations with a maximum Exercises powers and authority of Other $87,730 fine of $200, and/or a term of Mayor over court. Total $6,012,986 imprisonment up to 30 days. Defense services to indigents Assigned counsel rates In drunk driving cases, may impose fine of up to $500 and/or jail Statutory scheme Rates set by custom in jurisdiction sentence of up to 60 days. and judge discretion. Louisiana La w requires the Magistrates: establishment of an indigent The Louisiana Indigent Defendj~r defender board in each judicial Board is charged by statute (Ln. Rev. Justice of Peace Court district. Stat. Ann. Sec. 15:143(c)) with! the responsibility for establishing Serves only as Committing Board members are selected by the statewide rates. Magistrate. district court from nominees pro­ vided by each bar association within Because this Board has not been in Has power to set bail in cases that the district. existence since 197B, general r'ates are not necessarily punishable by are applied as follows: imprisonment. Each district board is required to select either an assigned counselor Hourly rate: May also set peace bonds. public defender program. Out-of--court $25 In-court $35 19th Judicial District Court. Statute: La. Code Crim. Proc. Sec. Commissioner 15-141 et. seq. Maximums: Capital case May hear and recommend disposition Actual system Felony $1,000 of ('riminal and civil cases arising Misdemeanor $500 out of the incarcer!

78 National Criminal Defense Systems Study e ...... Minimum fees are $100 for felony Maine Conducts preliminary hearings in and $50 for misdemeanor. felony cases. All 16 counties contacted for survey. Appeals: May try misdemeanor cases, Court of last resort: including traffic. None. Supreme Judicial Court Has exclusive jurisdiction in juvenile Flat rate or per diem: matters. May render advisory opinions. None. Probate Court Has original jurisdiction equal to Expense limits: Su;?erior Court. Includes jurisdiction over adoptions and guardianships. None. Sits as Law Court: o may review questions of law Administrative Court By statute (La. Rev. Stat. Ann. certified from trial courts, even 15:149), counsel shall also be when case has not been completed, Tries actions to suspend, revoke, reimbursed for expenses necessarily on certification from trial court or or refuse a license. incurred. on agreed statement facts from parties Municipal courts: G in other matters when case comvleted. None.

Sits as Appellate Court: Magistrates: o hears appeals from criminal cases o reviews sentences in excess of 1 District Court Complaint Justice year o appeals on questions of law in May receive complaints and issue criminal and juvenile cases by the process for arrest. State, but limited to cross-appeals and in certain pretrial orders May issue search warrants. o appeals from the Superior Court on questions of law juvenile cases. May endorse certificates of commitment of the mentally ill. Intermediate appellate court: Defense services for indigents None. Statutory scheme Court of general trial jurisdiction: State statute provides that judges of Superior Court State superior and district courts shall appoint counsel to indigent Exercises original jurisdiction over defendants and order reasonable all matters, either exclusively or compensation for services concurrently with other courts, that performed. are not within jurisdiction of Supreme Judicial Court or exclu­ Statute: Maine Rules of Court, sively in jurisdiction of another Rules of Crim. Proce. Rule 44. court. Actual system All felonies heard in Superior Court. Maine is a total ad hoc assigned Can provide injunctive relief. counsel State.

Hears civil, criminal, and juvenile Each judge is responsible for appeals from District Court. appointing counsel in his or her court and each judge uses his or her own Courts of limited or special method for identifying assigning jurisdiction: counsel.

District Court Costs

May receive guilty pleas in felony The 8ta te provides all funds for cases. indigent defense services in Maine.

National Criminal D~nse Systems Study 79 Appendix C

G&9 It rn

Total costs by source: Expense limits: Maryland state $1,088,653 County Investigators, expert witnesses, and Counties selected for survey: Other transcripts are provided at courts 1. Montgomery 6. Frederick Total $1,088,653 discretion, pursuant to Me. Rev. 2. Prince Georges 7. Howard Stat. Ann. Title 15, Section 810. 3. Baltimore 8. Harford Assigned council rates 4. Anne Arundel 9. Caroline Investiga tors 5. Allegany Rates set by court rule statewide Expert witness and judge discretion. Transcripts Court of last resort: Social services On July 1, 1981, the Supreme Travel $15/hr Court of Appeals Judicial Court issued a detailed fee .20/mile schedule and recommended its Total Has original jurisdiction over bar adoption statewide. matters and certain legislative and gubernatorial questions. The figures below reflect the rates in this schedule: Has appellate jurisdiction to review decisions of Court of Special Appeals Hourly rate: by certiorari. Out-of-

Maximums: Court of Special Appeals

Total compensation payable is Has no original jurisdiction. subject to the review of the presiding judge, who shall certify Has initial appellate jUrisdiction over that such payment is fair compen­ all causes except those where Court sation. of Appeals has been granted exclu­ sive appellate jurisdiction. In some counti~'l, informal limits are imposed. Court of general trial jurisdiction:

Capital case $3,000- Circuit Court with CO-

District Court Has jurisdiction over violations of vehicle laws, misdemeanors, and

80 National Criminal Defense Systems Study & ..

non felonious ordinance violations and Actual system In~'estigators No dollar .. certain statutory theft offenses Expert witness limits where value of stolen property does The statewide public defender Transcripts not exceed $500. system operates out of 12 regional Social services offices located in each of Maryland's Travel $.12/mii:** In Montgomery County, District judicial distric ts. Total $32/day Court has jurisdiction over juvenile causes. Costs *Expenses for transcripts are authorized and paid by the court. 9rphan's Court All costs of indigent defense services in Maryland are the l'esponsibility of **When outside district in which The Probate Court. the State. appointed.

In Montgomery County, probate Total costs by source: matters are handled in the Circuit State $10,270,310 Court. County Other Municipal court: Total $10,270,310

None. Assigned council rates

Magistrates: Rates set by St8.te Public Defender.

Circuit Court Md. Code Ann., art. 27 A, Sec. 6(d) empowers the State Public Defender Master and Juvenile Master­ to promUlgate rates that are inte­ Heai's cases assigned by the court grated into its administration of and makes findings and recom­ assigned counsel panels. mendations to Circuit Judges fOl' disposition. Hourly rates: Out-of-court $20 Auditor and Examiner- ln-court $25 Power to audit and settle accounts. Maximums: District Court Capital case Felony $1,000 Com missioner- Misdemeanor $250 Determines probable cause for Other * warrants and criminal summons and conducts bail hearings. *Mental Health $500 Juvenile $250 Defense services for indigents Appeals (hourly rate): statutory scheme Out-of court In-court In Maryland, a statewide Office of Maximum $500 Public Defender is established in the executive branch of state govern­ Flat rate or per diem: ment. None. The Governor appoints a three­ member board of trustees to oversee Expense limits: the public defender system. Public defender provides staff Each district has an advisory board investigative services to assigned appointed by the governor to oversee counsel. the local district public defender program. Public defender maintains list of expert witnesses, which it encour­ The statewide board is charged with ages assigned counsel to use, and establishing a local private bar panel prior authorization is required. system to handle cases where the local public defender has a conflict or is unavailable.

National Criminal Dfjense Systems Study 81 Appendix C

p g "' ":me' ,,, ql Massachusetts 2. Housing Court Department: o rules on uncontested evidentiary Has concurrent jurisdiction with issues All 14 counties will be contacted for Superior Court in criminal actions o sets pretrial conferences survey. concerned with health, safety, or G hears complaints on minor motor welfare of any place used for human vehicle offenses Court of last resort: habita tion. e conducts preliminary probation violation hearings. Supreme Judicial Court 3. Land Court Department 4. Guardian Ad Litem A single justice may exercise 4. Probate and Family Court Acts as legal representatives for original jurisdiction in equity Department: minors and others, including matters concurrent with Trial Court. Has exclusive jurisdiction in probate mentally retarded persons. and family matters. Certain matters pertaining to system 5. Bail Commissioner are in exclusive original jurisdiction. 5. Boston Municipal Court Determines releases on bail or Department: personl;ll recognizance. May issue necessary writs and Has criminal jurisdiction concurrent process. with Superior Court in misdemeanors Defense services to indigents and ordinance violations and felonies Has appellate jurisdiction in "ases of with less than 5-year penalties. Statutory scheme 1st degree murder where a sentence of life imprisonment is imposed. 6. Juvenile Court Department: By statute the Massachusetts All delinqueney and CHINS cases. Defenders Committee (MDC) is Has appellate jurisdiction where established as a State agency cause is certified by SJC or Appeals 7. District COut·t Department: responsible for primary repre­ Court, or in any case that has broad Same crimina.l jurisdiction as Boston sentation in the courts of the public concern. Municipal Court. Commonwealth.

Has appellate jurisdiction of cases Also conducts probable cause In addition, judges have the authority decided by Appeals Court only on hearings in all felonies. to appoint members of the bar on an certifica tion. individual basis. Court of limited or special Intermediate appellate court: jurisdiction: Statute: Ma. Crim. Proc. 276-37A.

Appeals Court None-Old courts of limited or Actual system special jurisdiction were Has no original jurisdiction. incorporated into the Trial Court Because of the lack of adequate with court reorganization in 1978. funding ($3.5M) the MDC is primarily Has concurrent appellate jurisdiction limited to representation in felony with SJC over proceedings heard in Municipal courts: cases in the Superior Court. the Trial Court in criminal matters, except in cases when life imprison­ None (except see Boston Municipal The agency also does some probable ment is imposed. Court). cause work in the District Courts and has an appellate unit. Also has jurisdiction to review pro­ Magistrates: ceedings relating to extraordinary Also does some juvenile work in writs. Trial Court selected juvenile courts.

Court {)f general trial jurisdiction: 1. Masters Under contract with the Chief o make findings of fact in matters Administrative Judge of the Trial Court of the Commonwealth assigned by courts Commonwealth, 11 individual county o ascertain evidence bar associations (there are 14 Has 7 departments- 8 provide reports on issues counties) provides most of the G check pleadings, etc. juvenile work. 1. Superior Court Department: o other related duties. Has original jurisdiction in all Individual lawyers provide the criminal and civil actions except in 2. Housing Court Specialists representation on behalf of the cases where another court has exclu­ County Bar Advocate Program. sive original jurisdiction. 3. Clerk Magistrate o performs various Clerk of Court There is also a nonprofit agency, The Appellate Division hears appeals duties Roxbury Defenders Committee, from sentences imposed in first in­ o rules on continuances representing selected defenders in a stance. Also trial de novo appeals limited number of courts. from certain actions.

82 National Criminal De,fense Systems Study t:n iii'" N

Finally, there is still a rather large Flat rate or per diem: Michigan volume of cases that are assigned to the private bar in all 14 counties. Under the Bar Advocate Program Counties sele'cted for survey: attorneys may be paid either (1) a 1. Wayne 10. Grand Traverse Costs flat fee (e.g., $150) for felonies or 2. Oakland 11. Calhoun misdemenaors or (2) a standard fee 3. Macomb 12. Ingham All costs of indigent defense services (e.g., $100) for the initial appearance 4. Kent 13. Isabella in Massachusetts are paid for by the plus an additional fee (e.g., $50) for 5. Genesee 14. Saginaw state. each continuing day. 6. Marguette 15. Washtenaw 7. Muskegon 16. Monroe Total costs by source: Actual fees paid vary from county to 8. Allegan 17. Sanilac state $13,092,198 county. 9. st. Joseph County other Expense limits: Court of last resort: Total $13,092,198 Mass. Ann. Laws, Chap. 261 requires Supreme Court ,Assigned counsel rates that expenses be paid for witnesses, transcripts, etc. May 'issue orders of superintending Rates set by court rule statewide. control over court system. No limits are sp~cified under the Bar Rules 8 (District and Municipal Advocate Program. Has appellate jurisdiction over all courts) and 53 (Superior Court) appeals pending or decided by Court of Appeals. Hourly rate: Out-of-court $25* Intermediate appellate courts: In-court $35** Court of Appeals * For time expended outside evidentiary hearing or trial, with Has original jurisdiction to issue maximum of 5 hours for preparation prerogative and remedial writs or time and 1 hour for time related to a orders necessary to maintain ability ~gurt appearance. to decide cases. For time actually engaged in evidentiary hearing or trial. Has appellate jurisdiction over all final judgments from Circuit Court Maximums: and Court of Claims. Capital case See below Felony $1,000 Also has appellate jurisdiction over Misdemeanor $300 Detroit's Recorder's Court, except Other from Traffic and Ordinance Division and Probate Court cases in adoption Rule 53 specifications for murder and other cases. case: Court of general trial jurisdiction: Maximums: District Court $100 Circuit Court All other $2,500 services Exclusive original jurisdiction in Expenses (if no $100 felony cases, except where a special more than criminal court has been created. one trial) For each retrial $2,500 Hears appeals from final judgments Expenses $100 from Distrkt, Probate, Common Pleas Courts, and Recorder's Court, Maximums can be waived by court Traffic and Ordinance Division. order. Appeals from Municipal Court are de novo. Appeals: Court of Claims None.

National Criminal DcifellSe Systems Study 83 JlIIJpendix C

e .• .. t; 1 .., filM a if *a Recorder's Court of Detroit and ordinance violation cases *The total amount of the State referred by court. contribution is funding for the State Has original jurisdiction over all Appellate program. criminal cases arising within Detroit District Court Magistra te City limits. Assigned counsel rates As authorized, may arraign and Hears Habeas Corpus Petitions. sentence persons pleading guilty in Rates set by judge discretion. certain cases with less than 90-day Trame and Ordinance Division has sentence. Mich. Stat. Ann. Sec. 28.1253 exclusive original jurisdiction in all stipulates that "assigned counsel Traffic and Ordinance violations. May issue arrest and search shall receive an amount that the warrants, set bond, etc. presiding judge shall in his discretion Courts of limited or special deem reasonable compensation ... " jurisdiction: Probate Court Register Hourly rate: District Court Performs nonjudicial duties. These figures represent the most Jurisdiction in misdemeanor cases Defense services to indigents commonly reported rates in the where penalty is a fine and/or a jail counties surveyed. In general, rates term of up to 1 year. Statutory scheme vary from county to county.

Hears ordinance violations. The criminal code in Michigan Out-of court $30 provides for the appointment of In-court $30 Arraignments, bail, and preliminary counsel for indigents in all classes of hearings in all felony and misde­ cases. Maximums: meanor cases not cognizable in District Court. The statute has been construed, Varies from county to county. however, to permit the establish­ Hears traffic cases. ment of a public defender program. Appeals:

Probate Court By State statute there is also a State Varies from county to county. appellate clefender program estab­ Has exclusive original jurisdiction in lished. Flat rate or per diem: all estate, mental health, and other related cases. Statute: Mich. Stat. Ann. Sec. Each of the circuits employing fee 28.1253. schedules relies on different Also has exclusive original payment plans. jurisdiction in delinquency and Actual system CHINS cases. In one circuit all services rendered At the time of the survey, 5 counties up through a 2-day trial are reim­ Common Pleas Court of Detroit operated with a public defender and bursed for $300. the remaining 78 were about evenly Has civil jurisdiction only. split between assigned counsel and An appearance is typically billed at contract progl'ams. $50.00; sentencing is also billed at Municipal court: $50.00. There is also a State appellate Has jurisdiction in felony preliminary defender program. Substantial differences are found in hearings, misdemeanors involving a the rates for which different days of fine or impl'isonment of less than 1 Costs trial are paid and even the number of year, and traffic ordinances. hours in a trial day. The State funds the appellate Magistrates: defender program. As the Wimsatt study reports: The first day of trial is paid at the rate Supreme Court and Court of Appeals All other funds for indigent defense of $100 in some courts; $150 and services in Michigan are provided by $200 is paid in other circuits. Prepares reports and recom­ the counties. mendations for discretionary Expense limits: appeals. Total costs by source: Varies from county to county. Recorders Court Referee State $1,873,100* County $21,378,331 Administrates oaths, examines Other $150,000 witnesses, and makes reports and Total $23,401,431 recommendations in misdemeanor

84 Nadonal Crinllnai Defonse Systems Shtdy ; ", %* 1ft'£! '8# ¥ '#k86'* .... E

Minnesota County Court In all other judicial districts, the judge may establish a district public Counties selected for survey: In criminal division, has jurisdiction defender system or an assigned 1. Hennepin 10. Renville over misdemeanors and may conduct counsel system. 2. Ramsey 11. McLeod preliminary hearings. 3. Dakota 12. Crow Wing statute: Minn. Stat. Ann. Sec. 4. Anoka 13. Carver Probate division has jurisdiction of 611.12 et seq. 5. st. Louis 14. Freeborn Probate Court. 6. Polk 15. Carlton Actual system 7. Nobles 16. Washington Juvenile Division has concurrent 8. Becker 17. Olmsted jurisdiction with District Court. Approximately half of Minnesota's 9. Pope counties are served by public Has exclusive jurisdiction over defenders while the other half are Court of last resort: incompetency proceedings and delin­ served by assigned counsel systems. quency matters. ~reme Court Costs Conciliation Court Has or!;,rinal jurisdiction in remedial The State funds the appellate cases ,lS prescribed by law. None. defender program.

May issue all necessary writs and Municipal courts: All other expenditures are pro'Jided orders. by the counties. County Municipal Court (Hennepin May answer questions of law certi­ and Ramsey Counties) Total costs by source: fieel by U.S. Supreme Court or a State $851,358* Federal Court. Has jurisdiction in criminal matters County $9,463,006 constituting misdemeanors. Other $102,360 F'~;" lppellate jurisdiction over all Total $10,416,724 ca~~s. Magistrates: "'Full amount of State contribution is Intermediate appellate court: District Court Referee funding for State appellate program.

None. Hears assigned cases and makes Assigned counsel rates recommendations to the judge. Court of general trial jurisdiction: Rates set by custom in jurisdiction Probate Court Referee and judge discretion. District Court Hears assigned cases and makes In approximately 20% of the counties Has original jurisdiction in all recommendations to the judge. the judges collaborate in setting criminal and civil cases. uniform rates for the particular County Court Probate Register region in question. In Hennepin and Ramsey Counties, District Court has juvenile juris­ Performs ministerial functions. No statutory authority. diction. County Court Judicial Officer Hourly rate: In 2nd and 4th Judicial Districts, Out-of-court $35 Family Division created to hear all Has same authority as judge. In-court $35 family matters. County Municipal Court Hearing Rates apparently vary dramatically Has appellate jurisdiction in every Officer (Hennepin County); with some counties paying as much case in which an appeal is allowed as $60!hour for in-court time. from any other court. Hears minor traffic violations. The above figures represent the Courts of limited or special Defense services to indigents rates most commonly reported in the jurisdiction: survey. Statutory scheme Probate Court (Hennepin and Maximums: Ramsey Counties): By statute in Minnesota the two largest judicial districts (Hennepin Varies widely, according to judge's Has jurisdiction in law and equity to and Ramsey, first and second, discretion. administer estates, guardianships, respectively) must have a public and incompetency proceedings. defender system. Maximums are more common for lesser offenses.

National Criminal Defense Systems Study 85 Appendix C

- tiLl 2 Maximums are particularly low in Mississippi Chancery Court rural areas. Counties selected for survey: Exercises original jurisdiction in, Appeals: 1. Hinds 10. Yolobusha among other things: 2. Harrison 11. Chickasaw • probate None. 3. Bolivar 12. Jones o juvenile 4. Claiborne 13. Jackson o mental competency cases. Flat I'ate or per diem: 5. Copiah 14. Forrest 6. De Soto 15. Lauderdale Has same authority as Circuit CO'

For expmple, one county pays a flat Supreme Court Courts of limited or special rate of $50 for each appearance for jurisdiction: a mental commitment hearing. Each justice has authority to issue extraordinary writs. County Court (16 counties) Expense limits: Hears all appeals from all cases Has criminal jurisdiction in all Minn. stat. Ann. Sec. 611.21 originating in Circuit and Chancery misdemeanor cases. stipulates the above maximum for Courts, except when a guilty plea is compensation paid for investigative, entered. Conducts preliminary examinations expert, or other services necessary in felony cases. to an adequate defense. Direct Appeal from County Court permitted for those noncapital Has jurisdiction in all criminal, non­ Investigators $300 felony cases transferred to County capital cases transferred from Cir­ Expert witnesses $300 Court by Circuit Court. cuit Court. Transcripts Social services $300 Appeals from Justice and Municipal All matters to be heard in Justice Travel Courts are heard in Circuit Court, Court may be heard in County Court. Total with appeal to Supreme Court permitted only when a constitutional Youth Division in all 16 County question is raised, and then only with Courts, except in Harrison County acceptance of the Circuit Court (when it is in Family Court), which Judge. has exclusive jurisdiction in juvenile matters. Intermediate appellate court: Family Court (Harrison Co.) None. Has exclusive jurisdiction in all Courts of general trial jurisdiction: juvenile matters.

Circuit Court Justice Courts (5 counties)

Has original jurisdiction in all civil Has concurrent criminal jurisdiction and criminal matters, unless juris­ with Circuit Court in cases where diction is vested in another court. fine or County Jail sentence may be imposed. Following courts have concurrent jurisdiction: Justice in criminal Municipal courts: matters where the punishment does not exceed a fine and imprisonment Municipal (Police) Court in County Jail. Has jurisdiction over all municipal Appeals heard from Law Division of ordinance violations. County Court and from Justice and Municipal Courts, except in those Sits as committing court in all counties where there is a County felor;:ies committed within the Court. municipality and in all State criminal law violations committed in the cou!'lty and outside the municipal boundaries.

86 National Criminal Defense Systems Study = In cities where no Family or County Costs Missouri Court exists, Municipal Court has exclusive jurisdiction over All funds for indigent defense Counties selected for survey: juvenile matters. services in Mississippi are provided 1. Jackson 10. Cooper by the counties. 2. st. Louis 11. Boone Magistrates: 3. Greene 12. Laclede Total costs by source: 4. Holt 13. Audrain Chancery Court Master State 5. Clay 14. Gasconade County $2,134,112 6. Vernon 15. Warren Such duties as he or she is assigned other 7. Barry 16. St. Charles by the court. Total $2,134,112 8. Ray 17. st. Francois 9. Hickory 18. Stockland Chancery Court Special Assigned counsel ra tes Commissioner Court of last resort: Rates set by statute and judge Same as above. discretion. Supreme Court

Circuit Court Referee Miss. Code Ann. Sec. 99-15-17 May issue and determine original establishes maximum allowable rates remedial writs. Same as above. of compensation. Has exclusive appellate jurisdiction c..ircuit and Chancery Court Hourly rate: in all cases involving all appeals with Arbitra tors offenses punishable by !l

National Criminal Dtjense Systems Study 87 Appendix C

Municipal Division has exclusive Total costs by source: Montana jurisdiction over city ordinance State $4,408,413 violations. County Counties selected for survey: Other 1. Missoula 9. Lewis &. Clark Has no appellatb jurisdiction. Total $4,408,413 2. Cascade 10. Gallatin 3. Yellowstone 11. Chouteau Courts of lim ited or special Assigned counsel rates 4. Flathead 12. Park jurisdiction: 5. Lincoln 13. Fergus Rates set by State Public Defender. 6. Beaverhead 14. Powder River None. 7. Silver Bow 15. Richland In those rare cases where private 8. Lake Municipal courts: assigned counsel are employed, the rates of compensation are set at the Court of last resort: None. discretion of the State public defender, pursuant to Mo. Rev. Stat. Supreme Court Magistrates: Sec. 600.017. Has original jurisdiction to issue, None. Hourly rate: hear, and determine writs of habeas corpus and other writs as provided by Defense services to indigents This figure represents the hourly law. rate most commonly imposed by the statutory scheme public defender. Can issue all other extraordinary writs. By statute, Missouri has created a It should be noted that under the statewide Public Defender Commis­ statewide public defender system in Appellate jurisdiction extends to all sion, which funds the cost of indigent Missouri, most conflicts are handled cases of law and equity. defense services statewide. either by contract with the private bar or appointed to an adjoining Intermediate appellate courts: The legislation allows regional public public defender program. defender offices serving more than None. one judicial district. Out-of-court $20 In-court $20 Court of general trial jurisdiction: As of the effective date of the act, April 1, 1982, cases were no longer Maximums: District Court referred to the private bar by local judges. These figures represent the Has statewide jurisdiction in all maximum limits most commonly felony cases. Instead, public defender offices were imposed by the public defender. established throughout the State and Has jurisdiction in misdemeanors defense service contracts awarded to Capital case that are not assigned to courts of local attorneys or law firms where Felony $500- limited jurisdiction. defender offices were impractical. (trial) 750 (plea) $250 Can issue all necessary writs. Statute: Mo. Ann. Stat. Sec. 600.010 Misdemeanor $250 et. seq. Other Has appellate jurisdiction over courts of limited jurisdiction. Actual system Appeals (hourly rate): Appeals are heard de novo, unless At the time of our survey, the old These figures represent the rates otherwise provided by law. system was in effect. typically set by the public defender. Courts of limited or special Under the old system a majority of Out-of-court $25 jurisdiction: the counties were served by assigned In-court $20 counsel programs. Maximum $500 Justice of Peace Court

Costs Flat rate or per diem: Has criminal jurisdiction in assaults, thefts of property not exceeding All costs for indigent defense None. $150, and misdemeanors punishable services in Missouri are the by fine not exceeding $500 or im­ responsibility of the State. Expense limits: prisonment not exceeding 6 months, or both. None

88 National Criminal Defense Systems Study dJ I.

City Court Costs It may be exceeded by the district court judge in justifiable cases. In cities and towns of less than All costs for indigent defense 10,000 population services in Montana are the Out-of-court ., has concurrent jurisdiction with responsibility of the counties . In-court Justice of Peace Court Maximum $2,000 G handles felony filings and Total costs by source: preliminary exams, misdemeanors, State Flat rate or per diem: and applications for search warrants. County $1,399,785 Other In some cases, the surveyed counties Water Court Total $1,399,785 reported the use of the below flat rates of compensation. None. Assigned counsel rates Felony $50 Municipal courts: Rates set by court rule statewide Misdemeanor $50 and judge discretion. Appeal Municipal Court (in cities of more Other than 10,000 population) By statute (Mont. Rev. codes Ann. Sec. 46-8-201 et. seq.), wherever in a Expense limits: Has concurrent jurisdiction with criminal proceeding an attorney District Court in forcible entry and represents or defends any person who None. detainer actions. is Indigent, the attorney shall be paid such sum as a district court or Pursuant to the statute cited above, Has concurrent jurisdiction with justice of the State Supreme Court counsel shall be reimbursed for Justice of Peace Court. certifies to be a reasonable compen­ reasonable costs incurt'ed in the sation and shall be reimbursed for proceedings. Hears ol-dinance violation cases. reasonable costs incurred in the criminal proceeding. Magistrates: The Supreme Court has established District Court Judge Pro Tempore maximum allowable levels of com­ pensation for criminal proceedings Has full power of judges to hear and and appeals, as reported below. detet'mine cases. Hourly rate: District Court Master These figures represent the most Pursuant to court order, m,lY hear commonly reported rates for the evidence and report findings to surveyed counties. Rates vary from judge. county to county, between $20 and $40 an hour. Water Court Master Only three counties distinguish in­ Defense services to indigents court from out-of-court time.

Statutory scheme Out-of-court $20 In-court $30 By statute the Board of County Commissioners in any county may Maximums: create a public defender office and appoint a salaried public defender. This maximum applies to the costs of a criminal proceeding incurred with­ All other counties operate on an out prior court approval, pursuant to assigned counselor contract basis. Supreme Court rule. statute: Mont. Rev. Code Sec. 46- Capital case $5,000 8-202. Felony $5,000 Misdemeanor $5,000 Actual system Other $5,000

At the time of our survey, four Appeals (hourly rate): counties were served by a public defender, 37 by an assigned counsel, The maximum applies to appeals and 15 by a contract system. financed by county funds.

National Criminal D£ifense Systelns Study 89 Appendix C

c tt'M# €@ iIii2§

Nebraska Has exclusive original jurisdiction in, Defensive services to indigents among other things: Counties selected for survey: o guardianship and conservatorships Statutory scheme 1. Lancaster 10. Adams o ordinance violations where no 2. Douglas 11. Boone Municipal Court Each county is required to provide 3. Sarpy 12. Madison o where there is no Special Juvenile sufficient funding for indigent 4. Scotts Bluff 13. Thayer Court for juvenile matters, except it defense services. 5. Dawes 14. Stanton is concurrent with District Court for 6. Lincoln 15. Cuming what woulc;l be felony offenses. The counties may select the type of 7. Dawson 16. Gage services they desire, provided, how­ 8. Buffalo 17. Cass Conducts preliminary examinations ever, that if a county chooses a 9. Hall in felony cases. public defender program, the public defender shall be elected to a 4-year Court of last resort: Se arate Juvenile Court term. in Douglas, Lancaster, and Sarpy Supreme Court Counties) Public defender programs are required in counties with a May sit en banc or in two divisions of Has exclusive original jurisdiction in population exceeding 200,000. five justices each. juvenile matters-same as for County Court. Statute: Neb. Rev. Stat. Sec. 29- En banc, hears all appeals in 1804 et. seq. homicide cases and where constitu­ Women's Compensation Court tionality of statute is challenged, Actual scheme and may review any decision of one Municipal courts: of the divisions. At the time of our survey, 26 Municipal Court (Douglas and counties were served by a public All District Court decisions can be Lancaster Counties) defender, 62 by an assigned counsel, appealed as a matter of right to the and 5 by a contract system. Court or a division thereof. Has exclusive original jurisdiction over municipal ordinance violations. There is some question, however, as Intermediate appellate courts: to whether or not some of these Has concurrent jurisdiction with public defender programs might None. County Court in civil and criminal more accurately be described as a cases. contract program. Court of general trial jurisdiction: Magistra tes: Costs District Court District and County Court Referees All costs of indigent defense services Has both chancery and common law and Masters in Nebraska are the responsibility of jurisdiction in all criminal and civil the counties. matters unless vested in other courts Decide disputes and render decisions (e.g., probate, guardianship, or for court on stipulation of parties. Total costs by source: conservatorship, most juvenile State matters, and ordinance violations). County Court Associate Judges County $2,708,986 Other Has appellate jurisdiction over If an attorney, same authority as Total $2,708,986 appeals from County and Municipal judge. Courts, and most administrative Assigned counsel ra tes agencies. Limited authority if not an attorney. Rates set by custom in jurisdiction Court of limited or special Separate Juvenile Court Associate and judge discretion. jurisdiction: Judge Neb. Rev. Stat. Sec. 29-1804 stipu­ County Court Determines cases as assigned by lates that the appointing courts shall court. fix reasonable fees and expenses. Has concurrent jurisdiction with District Court in criminal actions Municipal Court Acting Judge Hourly rate: where penalty does not exceed 1 year of imprisonment or a fine of Serves in same capacity as judge. These figures represent the most $500. commonly reported by surveyed counties.

90 National Criminal Defense Systems Study M& '1 e *' "" # § The rates vary from county to Nevada Magistrates: county and may be increased by the court at its discretion. All 17 counties contacted for survey. District Court Juvenile Master

Out-of-court $35 Court of last resort: May swear witnesses and make In-court $35 findings of fact and recom­ Supreme Court mendations on ad hoc basis. Maximums: May issue all extraordinary writs If no hearing by the court is None. necessary to complete exercise of requested, the findings and jurisdiction. recommendations of the Master Appeals: becomes a decree of the court. Appellate jurisdiction on questions of None. law alone in all cases in which the District Court Probate offense charged is within the original Commissioner Flat rate or per diem: jurisdiction of the District Court. DefeilSe services to indigents None. Appellate jurisdiction extends to all cases in equity. Statutory scheme Expense limits: Intermediate appellate court: By State statute the two largest None. counties, including Las Vegas and None. Reno respectively, are each required Reasonable expenses are allowed on to establish public defender offices. a case-by-case basis. Court of general trial jurisdiction: Each of the 15 remaining counties in District Court the State has the option of estab­ lishing its own public defender office Has original jurisdiction in criminal or joining with one or more counties cases not in jurisdiction of another to establish one public defender court. office to serve those counties.

Also functi

Has jurisdiction over misdemeanors At the time of the survey, all but 2 punishable by a fine and/or imprison­ of the 15 counties were part of the ment not exceeding 6 months ordi­ sta tewide system. nance violations, abatement of nui­ sam~es, vagrancy, disorderly conduct, petty larceny, minor assault and battery, and breaches of the peace.

National Cn'minal Defense Systems Study 91 Appendix C

"Z'E'!"r8- jlU my . Aif

Costs Expense limits: New Hampshire

The state provides about 5% of the Pursuant to Nev. Rev. Stat. Sec. All 10 counties contacted for survey. funds for indigent defense services in 7.135 an attorney is entitled to be Nevada, the counties the remaining reimbursed for expenses reasonably Court of last resort: 95%. incurred for investigative, expert, or other services necessary to an ade­ Supreme Court Total costs by source: quate defense, subject to the prior State $189,927 approval of the judge. Has general superintendence over all County $3,578,686 trial courts and may issue extra­ Other Compensation to any person ordinary writs. Total $3,829,489 furnishing such service shall not exceed the below maximum. Has appellate jurisdiction over Assigned counsel rates: questions of law from all courts, and Investigators $300 administrative agencies in the State. Rates set by statute and judge Expert witnesses $300 discretion. Transcripts Intermediate appellate courts: Social services Fee schedule is set by Nev. Rev. Travel None. Stat. Sec. 7.125. Other Court of general trial jurisdiction: Hourly rate: Out-of-court $20 Superior Court In-court $30 Sits in both law and equity. Maximums: Has original and exclusive juris­ The appointing court may grant a fee diction with District Court over in excess of the applicable maximum felony cases. in extraordinary circumstances. Has concurrent jurisdiction with Capital case $2,500 District Court over misdemeanor Felony $1,000 offenses. Misdemeanor $300 Other*' $300 Jury trials cannot be held in courts of limited jurisdictions; thus, all jury *Postconviction relief. trials are held in Superior Court.

Appeals: Hears misdemeanor appeals de novo Out-of-court from District Court. In-court Maximum Courts of limited or special (misdemeanor) $300 jurisdiction: (felony or gross misdemeanor) $1,000 Probate Court

Flat rate or per diem: Among its duties hears mental commitments and adoptions. None. District Court

Has original jurisdiction over all crimes and offenses involving a fine of up to $1,000, or imprisonment up to 1 year.

Court's criminal jurisdiction does not extend to areas that have Municipal Courts.

Original juvenile proceedings held in District Court.

92 National Criminal Defense Systems Study • iMP " :i lJiltl'L 'II.... i¥ib "ME -I

Municipal courts: other New Jersey Total $2,146,999 Municipal court Counties selected for survey: *State contribution includes $50,000 1. Mercer 5.Passaic There are 15 Municipal Courts. for the State appellate program. 2. Camden 6. Bergan 3. Ocean 7. Essex Has same criminal jurisdiction as the Assigned counsel rates 4. Middlesex 8. Hudson District Court. Rates set by court rule statewide Court of last resort: Magistrates: and judge discretion. Supreme Court Supreme Court and Superior Court N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. Sec. 604-A:4 Judicial Referee stipulates that an attorney shall be May exercise such original juris­ reasonably compensated at a level diction as may be necessary to Retired justices may be assigned to fixed by the court. complete the review of any matter. assist either court, but are not authorized to preside at trials by However, the New Hampshire Exercises appellate jurisdiction as jury or to enter judgments. Supreme Court has promulgated a Court of Last Resort. fee schedule for the State, as Superior Court Auditor, Master, reported below. -Appeals as a matter of right: Marital Master, and Referee e in cases determined by Appellate Hourly rate: Division of the Superior Court which May be appointed by court to preside Out-of-court $25 involve Federal or State constitu­ at hearings and present findings to In-court $35 tional questions court for disposition. o in cases when a member of Maximums: Appellate Division dissents Defensive services to indigents o in capital cases In murder cases the maximum limit o in other cases as provided by law. Statutory scheme does not apply. -Interlocutory orders: A statewide public defender agency However, the rule states that no o from trial court where death is in operation in New Hampshire. justice of the Superior Court shall penalty may be imposed, including approve any unreasonable charge. postconviction proceedings There is also a separate appellate o to prevent irreparable injury defender program. Capital case o on certification from Appellate Felony $1,500 Diviilion of the Superior Court. There is also provision for serious Misdemeanor $500 counties through an assigned counsel Other* $500 Intermediate appellate court: program with the approval of the State public defender. *Juvenile. Appellate Division of the Superior Court Statute: N.H. Rev. Stat. Sec. 604- Appeals: A:l et.seq. May exercise such original juris­ Although there is no official limit on diction as may be necessary to Actual system fees, they are carefully scrutinized complete review of any matter. by the Court. Four of New Hampshire's largest counties are served by public May hear appeals as a matter of Out-of-court $25 right from the Law and Chancery defender offices. In-court $35 Divisions of the Superior Court; from Maximum The other six less populous counties County District Court; and Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court (only are served by members of the Flat rate or per diem: private bar. in civil cases), and from summary Felony $200 contempt proceedings in Municipal Misdemeanor $200 Courts; as well as from Adminis­ Costs Appeal $200 Other $200 trative Agency hearings. All expenditures for indigent defense services are the responsibility of the Expense limits: Court of general trial jurisdiction: State. None. Superior Court Total costs by source: Investigative, expert, or other State $2,146,999* necessary ~ervices may be Divided into three divisions: County compensated upon a finding of 1. Appellate necessity and reasonableness by a 2. Law justice of the Superior Court. 3. Chancery

National Criminal D~nse Systems Study 93 Appendix C

''7 # gil w , ti

Law Division has general jurisdiction Magistra tes: Private attorneys submit their over all criminal matters. vouchers to the public defender who Superior Court Special Masters makes a judgment for payment based Chancery Division has concurrent on their experience. jurisdiction with Juvenile and Hold hearings on cases assigned by Domestic Relations Court as to courts. Hourly rate: custody, child support, and civil Out-of-court $15 commitments. Defense services to indigents In-court $23 Law Division has appellate Statutory scheme These figures represent the rates jurisdiction over appeals from most commonly reported by the Municipal Court and from certain The New Jersey Publ!.c Defender was counties surveyed. administrative agencies. established by statute in 1967 and is located within the Department of Maximums: Courts of limited or special the Public Advocate. jurisdictions: In some cases a maximum number of The public defender is appointed by billable hours for research is County District Court the Governor with the advice and established. consent of the Senate for a 5-year Among other matters has concurrent term •. Appeals: jurisdiction with the Municipal Court in ordinance violations and nonin­ Private attorneys are appointed None. dictable offenses. mainly in conflict cases and are called pool attorneys. Flat rate or per diem: Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court By statute the public defender may None. engage private counsel on a case-by­ Has exclusive jurisdiction in case basis as needed. Expense limits: following types of cases: Q juvenile delinquency The State Public Defender also By statute, expenses of the private o dependency and neglect operates an appellate division. bar related to representation are o over child in child abuse cases. determined by the State Public Statute: N.J. Stat. Ann. Sec. Defender. Surrogates Court 2A:158A-3 et. seq, Some of the rates include $125 per Probate. Actual system day for experts; $200 for medical reports; and $200 to $400 per day for Tax Court The New Jersey Public Defender court appearances. system consists of an appellate Municipal courts: section and 19 regional offices.

Municipal Court Costs

AI'; costs of indigent defense services Has jurisdiction over in l~ew Jersey are provided by the CI traffic offenses State. o minor criminal violations o ordinance violations Total costs by source: o probable cause hearings State $19,681,656 I) specified crimes where penalty County does not exceed 1 year of Other imprisonment and offenses where Total $19,681,656 value of property does not exceed $500. Assigned counsel rates

Criminal jurisdiction may be exer­ Rates set by State Public Defender. cised concurrently with County District Courts. By.statute (N.J. Stat. Ann. Sec. 2A:158-7) the State Public Defendel is charged with the responsibility for preparing a schedule of payment rates for services rendered by nonstaff.

94 National en'mina! De.(ense Systems Study - lata:::: .. H ¥# i Qi"""WiOt IriiJ4 tit New Mexico Children's Division has exclusive Defense services to indigents jurisdiction in all matteI's relating to Counties selected for survey: juveniles. §tatutory schemc 1. Bernadillo 7. Los Alamos 2. San·Juan 8. Santa Fe If Family Court is established, it has By statute, New Mexico has a 3. Dona Ana 9. San Miguel same jurisdiction as Children's statewide public defender syetem 4. McKinley 10. Eddy Division and exclusive jurisdiction in created as part of the State's 5. Valencia 11. Chaves o incompetency or insanity in adults criminal justice department. 6. Luna 12. Curry o guardianships. The Chief Public Defender is Coud of last resort: Has jurisdiction over offenses appointed by the Governor and is committed against a child by an responsible to a three-member board Supreme Court adult. also appointed by the Governor.

Has original jurisdiction to issue all Has appellate jurisdiction in all cases The Chief Public Defender has the extraordinary writs. originating in courts of limited juris­ authority to designate one or more diction. public defender districts. Has appellate jurisdiction over District Court decisions imposing the Courts of limited or special The Chief Public Defender is also death penalty or life imprisonment jurisdiction: permitted to establish a private bar and other cases where responsibility system of representation when the is not vested in the Court of Magistrate Court public defender, for any reason, Appeals. cannot provide representation. Has jurisdiction in misdemeanors and By writ of certiorari from final any other criminal actions as speci­ Statutes: N.M. Stat. Ann. Sec. 31- judgments of Court of Appeals. fied by law. 15-1 et. seq. In cases that are certified by Court Probate Court Actual system of Appeals. Small Claims Court of Albuguergue The system has offices located in the Intermediate appellate court: most populous areas such as Santa Metropolitan Court of Bernadillo Fe, Albuquerque, and other cities. Court of Appeals County In rural outlying areas, cases are Has no original jurisdiction. Consolidation of Magistrate, handled through contracts with pri­ Municipal, and Small Claims Courts vate lawyers or ad hoc private bar Has appeilate jurisdiction over any as of 7/1/80. appointments. criminal action or postconviction remedy proceeding, except those Has jurisdiction over misdemeanors The public defender budget is cases in which a judgment of a and other crimes with fines less than responsible for all costs: public District court imposes a death $1,000 and a sentence of less than 1 defender, contract, and ad hoc sentence or life imprisonment. year. appointment.

Also can review any violation of Handles preliminary hearings. Costs municipal or county ordinance where a fine or imprisonment is imposed. Municipal courts: All costs of indigent defense services in New Mexico are provided by the Court of general trial jurisdiction: Municipal Court State.

District Court Has exclusive jurisdiction over all Total costs by source: municipal ordinance violations. State $3,981,763 May establish two specialized County divisions beyond regular duties. Magistrates: Other Total $3,981,763 1. Children's Court Division. District Court Special Masters 2. Family Court Division. Assigned counsel rates Cases referred to masters in only Has exclusive jurisdiction in all exceptional ma tters. Fees are set by the State Public matters and causes not excluded by Defender. State constitution. Hourly rate: Out-of-court $20 In-court $30

National Cn'minal De,fonse Systems Study 95 Appendix C

N§' Wtx i'NT: bJiililiiilli

Maximums: New York Court of general trial jurisdiction: Capital case Felony $800 Counties selected for survey: Supreme Court Misdemeanor $800 1. Kings 9. Niagara Other $800 2. Queens 10. Monroe Has exclusive jurisdiction over :i. Nassau 11. Tioga felonies and indictable misdemeanors Appeals: 4. Suffolk 12. Cortland in New York City. 5. New York 13. St. Lawrence These fees will be doubled on 6. Bronx 14. Rockland Also has unlimited jurisdiction, but July 1, 1981. 7. Erie 15. Ulster usually hears cases that are outside 8. West- 16. Albany jurisdiction of other courts. Out-of-court $20 chester In-court $30 County Court Maximum $1,000 Court of last !"esort: Exercises unlimited jurisdiction over Flat rate or per diem: Court of Appeals all crimes and other violations of law. Not applicable. Has no original jurisdiction. Has appellate jurisdiction to hear Expense limits: Has appellate jurisdiction appeals from determinations of constitutionally limited to review District, City, Town, and Village Expenses are allowed on an questions of law, except: Justice Courts. individual case basis. o death penalty cases (deleted 10/10/80) Courts of limited or special o cases where Appellate Divisions of jurisdiction: Supreme Court finds new facts and enters judp ment accordingly Surrogate's Court o added 10/6/80: All appeals from Appellate Divisions of Superior Probate. Court and appeals in criminal cases from the Appellate Terms of the Family Court Supreme Court and from County Courts are taken to Court of Has jUrisdiction in cases involving Appeals. families and children o juvenile delinquency Intermediate appellate court: o CHINS o TPR's Appellate Divisions of the Supreme o guardianship and custody Court o other related matters. -Also has "Designated Felony Act Appellate Divisions hear and Parts" for hearing certain felony determine appeals from judgments or cases specified by statute. orders of the Courts of original jurisdiction in criminal and civil Civil Court of NYC cases. Criminal Court of NYC Appellate terms of the Supreme Court Jurisdiction to conduct felony arraignments and preliminary Appellate terms are established as hearings. needed by Justices of Appellate Division. Jurisdiction to hear, try, and determine all misdemeanors and As directed, have jurisdiction to hear ordinance violations. and determine appeals that may go to Appellate Divisions or to Supreme District Court Court, but may not hear appeals o from Supreme Court Exercises same jurisdiction as o from Surrogate Court Criminal Court of NYC. o from Family Court o from indictable criminal cases. Court of Claims

96 National Criminal Defonse Systems Study 0% ill l1 !f5 ¥f # ens P4 ?UN- k '"' Municipal courts: The State provides for special North Carolina priority programs in the larger City Court metropolitan areas. Counties selected for survey: 1. Mecklenburg 10. Robeson Same jurisdiction as Criminal Court Total costs by source: 2. Buncombe 11. Cumberland of NYC. Sta te $17,595,074 3. Burke 12. Person County $58,834,447 4. Gaston 13. Wake Town Justice Court and Village Other 5. Wilkes 14. Sampson Justice Court Total $76,429,521 6. Cabarrus 15. Lenoir 7. Forsyth 16. Granville Same criminal jurisdiction as Full amount of State contribution is 8. Rockingham 17. Craven Criminal Court of NYC. funding for the State appellate 9. Guilford 18. Currituck program. Magistra tes: Court of last resort: Assigned counsel rates Trial Court Referee Supreme Court Rates set by statute. Serves as needed. Has jurisdiction to issue N.Y. Jud. Law Sec. 722-b stipulates extraordinary writs. Family Court Hearing Examiner that counsel shall receive compen­ sation not exceeding the hourly rates H;as jurisdiction to review death Can hold hearings as assigned and and maximum limits reported below. penalty or sentence of life imprison­ make recommendations to the court. ment, except where guilty plea en­ Hourly rate: tered that is imposed by Superior Defense services to indigents Out-of-court $15 Court. In-court $25 Statutory scheme In its discretion on the motion of any Maximums: party, may certify cases filed in Article 18-B of the New York Court of Appeals for Supreme Court statute requires each county to By statute, the court can in review, either before or after Court formulate a plan to provide extraordinary cases exceed the of Appeals review. representation for indigents. maximum. Capital case $1,500 (1 atty) Intermediate appellate court: The plan may consist of (a) a public $2,000 (2+attys) defender; (b) a private legal aid Felony $750 Court of Appeals bureau or society; (c) a bar Misdemeanor $500 association plan whereby private Other $500 Has no original jurisdiction. counsel are assigned by an administrator, or (d) any combination Appeals: May issue remedial and perogative of the foregoing. writs. Maximum limits for appeal from Statute: N.Y. County Law Sec. 716 judgment of death are the same as Hears following appeals (among et. seq. those reported in "Maximums" above. others) by statute: e final judgments of Superior Court, Actual system For all other types of appeals, including judgments entered in a compensation shall be fixed by the postconviction hearing Public defender programs exist in all appellate court. 8 any interlocutory orders but 7 of New York's 62 counties. o any order or judgment entered by Out-of-court $15 Superior Court from which an appeal Those counties operate a coordinated In-court $25 assigned counsel panel program. is authorized by statute Maximum o from judgments in juvenile proceedings. Costs Flat rate or per diem: Court of general trial jurisdiction: The counties provide over 75% of the None. costs of indig~nt defense services in Superior Court New York over all. Expense limits: Has original general jurisdiction For most counties the figure is None. 100%. throughout the State. Pursuant to the above-cited statute, private counsel is to receive reim­ bursement for expenses reasonably incurred.

National Cn'minal Defense Systems Study 97 Appendix C

... QiWW i1l

Has exclusive original jurisdiction All public defenders are full-time In some cases in-court hourly rates over all felonies and may try misde­ with compensation set the same as are different for misdemeanors and meanors in certain situations speci­ that of a full-time district solicitor. felonies. fied by law. In districts without a public Out-of-court $30 Has appellate jurisdiction over defender, the statute provides that In-court $40 misdemeanors appealed from the the North Carolina State Bar Council District Court, which are heard trial shall make rules and regulations Maximums: de novo. "relating to the manner and method of assigning counsel, the procedure These figures represent the ranges of Court of limited or special for the determination of indigency, maximum reported by the counties jurisdiction: waiver of counsel, the adoption and surveyed: approval of plans by any district bar District Court regarding the method of assignment Capital Case of counsel among the licensed Felony $200- Has jurisdiction in felony cases to attorneys of the district." 500 conduct pl'eliminary hearings. Mis de meanor $100- The State has also established a 200 Has exclusive original jurisdiction State appellate defender program. Other for the trial of criminal actions, including municipal ordinance statute: N.C. Gen. Stat. Sec. 7A- Appeals: violations below grade of felony. 465 et. seq. Compensation for representation on Has exclusive original jurisdiction Actual system appeal is set by appellate discretion. over juvenile matters. At the time of our survey, 14 Flat rate or per diem: Municipal courts counties were being served by a judicial district public defender. None. None. The remaining 86 counties were Expense limits: Magistrates: served by an assigned counsel program. By statute (N.C. Gen. Stat. Sec. 7A- District Court Magistrate 454), the court has discretion to Costs approve fees for expert witnesses In criminal actions- and necesary expense of counsel. In North Carolina, all expenditures Can accept guilty pleas and enter for indigent defense services are the judgment in misdemeanor cases when responsibility of the State. punishment does not exceed 30 days or a $50 fine. Total costs by source: State $10,968,213* Can do same in traffic cases and County enter judgment according to a Other $38,825 schedule of fines. Total $11,004,038

Can issue warrants and set bail in *State contribution includes noncapital cases. $325,000 for the State appellate program. Can try worthless check cases where value is less than $400. Assigned counsel rates

Defense services to indigents Rates set by custom in jurisdiction and judge discretion. statutory scheme N.C. Gen. Stat. Sec. 7A-452 In North Carolina, public defender stipulates that the trial judge shall districts are established by specific award reasonable compensation to sta tutory designation. appointed counsel.

The public defender in each district Hourly rate: is appointed by the Governor from a list submitted by attorneys resident These figures represent the rates in the district. most commonly reported by the counties surveyed.

98 National Criminal Defense Systems Study ., = 1M North Dakota Courts of limited or special The purpose of the Commission jurisdiction: included the establishment of Counties selected for survp.y: standards and guidelines for program 1. Ward 9. Bottineau County Court (in 36 counties) operation throughout the State. 2. Burleigh 10. Wells 3. Cass 11. Stutsman Essentially Probate jurisdiction. Under these procedUres, counties 4. Grand Forks 12. Ramsey could select a public defender, 5. McKenzie 13. Walsh County Court with increased assigned counsel, or contract method 6. Stark 14. Ransom jurisdiction (in 17 counties) for operations. 7. McLean 15. Steele 8. Morton Has concurrent jurisdiction with Actual system Diiltrict Court in all criminal actions Court of last resort: below grade of a felony. At the time of the survey, three counties provided contract defense Supreme Court May issue warrants and set bail. services and the remaining 50 had an assigned counsel program. Has original jurisdiction to issue, Has concurrent appellate jurisdiction hear, and determine such original with District Court from final Costs and remedial writs as may be neces­ judgments of Municipal Court sary to exercise its jurisdiction. All costs of felony representation County Justice Court (in 36 counties) are the responsibility of the State. Has appellate jurisdiction to hear appeals from the District and County Has criminal jurisdiction in misde­ All remaining costs are the Courts with increased jUrisdiction. meanor violations of State law. responsibility of the counties.

Has appeals of criminal ma tters of May conduct preliminary hearings, Total costs by source: right. issue search and arrest wa!'rants, and State $571,000 set bail. County $376,633 Intermediate appellate court: Other Municipal courts: Total $947,633 None. Municipal Court Assigned counsel rates Court of general trial jurisdiction: Has exclusive original jurisdiction to Rates set by court rule statewide District Court hear, try, and determine all city and judge discretion. ordinance violations. There are seven judicial districts. Rates are set by the North Dakota Various divisions of the court may be Magistra te: Legal Counsel for Indigents created. Commission, established by the District Court Juvenile Supervisor: North Dakota Supreme Court, pur­ Has original jurisdiction in all cases, suant to N.D. Cent. Code 27-01-01.1 except as otherwise provided by law. Has various responsibilities over et. seq. pursuant to N.D. Cent. Code. investigations and actions in juvenile Family Division is specialized in matters. The rates set by the commission as order to protect rights of children, reported below are inclUded in etc. District Court Referee Supreme Court Policy 204.

Juvenile Division has exclusive May conduct hearings on any case in Hourly rate: original jurisdiction over the first instance on juvenile matters. following: Vouchers for payment may be o proceedings in which a child is May preside at Juvenile Court submitted monthly. alleged to be delinquent, unruly, or hearings and report findings and deprived recommendations and determine jf Out-of-court $50 o TPR's an act of delinquency was In-court $50 o proceedings from out-of-State committed. o other matters relating to children. Maximums: Defense services to indigents Has appellate jurisdiction over all None. final Judgments of County Justices Statutory scheme and Municipal Courts, and probate Fees in excess of $500 in a particular appeals from County Courts. In 1981, the State established the case require early prior written North Dakota Legal Counsel for approval of the presiding judge. Indigents Commission.

National Criminal Dejense Systelns Study 99 Appendix C

w La tin Nt

Fees in excess of $2,000 also require Ohio Juvenile Division has exclusive notifica tirm by the judge of the jurisdiction in juvenile matters. presiding judge in the judicial Counties selected for survey: district and the state Court 1. Hamilton 10. Huron Courts of limited or special Administrator. 2. Franklin 11. Lawrence jurisdiction: 3. Cuyahoga 12. Lorain In exceptional cases in which total 4. Montgomery 13. Summit Municipal court defense expenses may exceed $5,000 5. Butler 14. Stark the presiding judge must set a total 6. Auglaize 15. Jefferson Has criminal jurisdiction over all fixed fee payment, including counsel 7. Lucas 16. Portage Qrdinance violations and m is de­ fees, witnesses, and investigating 8. Clark 17. Lake meanors. expenses. 9.. Pickaway Conducts preliminary hearings in The guidelines also state that judges Court of last resort: felony cases. should avoid setting maximum reim­ bursable time limits in a case, Supreme Court Has appellate jurisdiction over beyond which counsel is not compen­ Mayor's Courts; appeals are trial de sated. Has original jurisdiction to issue novo. extraordinary writs necessary to Appeals (hourly rate): complete determination of any case County Court out-of-court $50 on review. In-court $50 Has criminal jurisdiction over traffic Maximum Has jurisdiction over appeals from offenses and all misdemeanors. Court of Appeals in foHowing: Flat rate or per diem: <1' cases of felony on leave first Has same appellate jurisdiction as obt&ined Municipal Court. None. e cases where conflicting decisions have been rendered by different Court of Claims Expense limits: divisions of Court of Appeals o cases of public or great general Municipal courts: Expenses for investiga tors, expert interest witnesses, out-of-town witnesses, e matter of right of appeals in cases Mayor's Court and court interpreters may be originating in Court of Appeals or reimbursed with the prior written involving the death penalty or a Mayors of municipalities not having approval of the presiding judge. constitutional question. an established Municipal Court have concurt'ent jurisdiction with the Investiga tors $250* IntermedIate appellate court: limited jurisdiction court serving the Expert witnesses $250* municipality to hear and determine Transcripts NC Court of Appeals cases involving ordinance and traffic Social services violations. Travel $500** Has original jurisdiction to issue Total extraordinary writs necessary to Magistra tes: complete determination of any case *Early prior written approval of the on review. Supreme Court and Court of Appeals presiding judge is required if a Master Commissioner lawyer anticipates cumUlative Has appellate jurisdiction to review investigatory or other defense any judgment or final order of any Conducts hearings on certain expenses in a particular case in court of general or limited juris­ motions for leave to appeal. excess of this amount. diction on questions of law. **Early prior written approval of the Court of Common Pleas presiding judge is required. Mileage In certain cases, court may weigh Commissioner and Referee and travel rates are provided in evidence and render judgment on NDCC 44-08-04 and 54-06-09. questions of law and fact. Municipal and County Courts Referee Court of general trial jurisdiction: Defense services to indigents Court of Common Pleas Statutory s(']1eme General Division has criminal jurisdiction over all crimes and Under Ohio law there is established offenses cxcept misdemeanors where an Ohio Public Defender Commis­ exclusive jurisdiction has been sion. granted to a court of lim ited jurisdiction.

100 National Oiminal Defense Systems Study be; :; .

The Commission is charged with These fees are reported below. Additional reimbursement shall be supervising and coordinating legal made for extraordinary cases at the representation for indigents accused Hourly rate: regular hourly rates, up to $200 per of crime in the state of Ohio. Out-of-court $30 day, plus expenses, whenever a trial In-court $40 continues beyond the following A nine-member governing board is periods: established and has the responsibility Maximums: Death penalty 25 days for appointing the State public Aggravated $12,500/1 atty. Aggravated defender to a 4-year term. murder $25,000/2 attys. murder 13 days Aggravated $4,000/1 atty.: Murder 8 days Under this plan, the individual murder $6,000/2 attys. Felonies county may establish a public (w/o specs) (degrees 1-4) 4 days defender program, an assigned counsel program, or a combination of Murder $3,000 In addition, some counties surveyed both. Felonies reported the use of the above flat (degrees 1-4) $1,000 fee for compensation in Statute: Ohio Rev. Code Ann. Sec. Misdemeanors misdemeanor cases. 120.03 et. seq. (degrees 1-4) $500 Expense limits: Actual system Juvenile Proceedings: Delinquency Investiga tors * At the time of our survey, 30 offenses $750 Expert witnesses * counties received services through Guardian Ad Transcripts public defender programs. Litem $150 Social services All others $300 Travel The remaining 58 counties were Total served by an assigned counsel Post conviction proceedings: system. With evidentiary Investigators provided by State hearing $750 Defender Commission on request by Costs Without hearing $300 counsel.

Subject to the availability of funds, Habeas Corpus, Parole, Probation *Limits set by individual judges the State is required to reimburse and all other proceedings not dependent on county policy; counties for indigent defense elsewhere otherwise attorney services plus services up to 50% provided that the classifed $300 either investigator or expert county meets the necessary stand­ witnesses are expected to stay ards developed by the Ohio Public Appeals (hourly ra te): within maximum established by Defender Commission. Out-of-court $35 Commission rule. In-court $35 The balance is paid by the counties. Maximum*

The 50% reimbursement rate has Death Penalty $4,000/ applied in all but 1 year since the 1 atty. Commission was established in 1976. $6,000/ 2 attys. Total costs by source: Aggravated State $9,597,422 murder County $8,498,911 (w/o specs)* $2,000 Other Felonies $1,000 Total $18,096,333 Misdemeanors $500

Assigned coun!;el rates Flat rate or per diem: Felony Rates set by State Public Defender. Misdemeanor $50 Appeal Ohio Rev. Code Ann. Sec. Other 120.04(8)(9) empowers the Sta te Public Defender to establish a schedule of maximum fees.

Some of the counties have adopted this schedule; others have not.

National Oiminal Defense Systems Study 101 Appendix C

...... *' ( i f?

Oklahoma Workers' Compensation Court Actual system

Counties selected for survey: Court of Tax Review At the time of the survey, there 1. Oklahoma 10. Kay were 2 counties served by public 2. Tulsa 11. Lincoln Court of Bank Review defender programs, 66 counties 3. Cleveland 12. Pontotoc served by assigned counsel, and 9 4. Beckham 13. Pittsburg Municipal courts: counties served by contract 5. Major 14. Rogers programs. 6. Caddo 15. Muskogee Municipal Court Not of Record 7. Comanche 16. Leflore Costs 8. Stephens 17. Ottawa Has original jurisdiction over all city 9. Logan ordinance violations. The State assumes all costs of the State Appellate Defender Program. Court of last resort: May be required to supervise juve­ niles placed on parole, probation, or All other costs are generated in each Supreme Court suspended sentence. district court for each county.

Has appellate jurisdiction over all Magistra tes: The county may supplement these civil appeals from the district court. funds as needed thr'oughout the year. Supreme Court Referee Certiorari jUrisdiction as set forth Total costs by source: under Court of Appeals. Performs duties as prescribed by the State $240,000* Supreme Court. County $2,652,820 Court of Criminal Appeals Other $99,133 District Court Referee Total $2,991,953 Has exclusive appellate jurisdiction in all criminal cases appealed from Mey be appointed in counties with *Pull amount of state contribution is the Municipal Criminal Court. OVel" iOO,OOO population. funding for the Sta te appellate program. Intermediate appellate court: Referees must be attorneys. Assigned counsel ra tes Court of Appeals May hear any juvenile case and report findings and recommendations Rates set by statute and judge Has power to dispose of any case to the judge. discretion. assigned by the Supreme Court. Defense services to indigents Okla. Sta t. Ann. 22 Sec. 1271 A decision of the Court of Appeals stipulates that attorneys shall be may be reviewed by the Supreme Statutory scheme paid a reasonable and just compen­ Court if a majodty of its justices sation not to exceed the maximum direct that certiorari be granted. By statute, public defenders are amounts reported below, the specific created in two instances: (1) in amounts to be left to the discretion Supreme Court may by order recall a counties with populations between of the presiding judge. case from the Court of Appeals. 24,727 and 60,000 (Title 19 O.S. 1971, Section 137.1) and (2) in Hourly rate: Court of general trial jurisdiction: counties of 200,000 or more Out-of-court $40 population (Title 19 O.S. 1971, In-court $40 District Court Section 138.1). Maximums; Unlimited original jUrisdiction in all Title 22 O.S., Section 1271 provides Capital case $2,500 justiciable matters and power to for compensation to court-appointed Felony $500 issue writs, remedial or otherwise, cClunsel in all counties with a Misdemeanor $500 necessary to effect its orders, population below 200,000. Other judgments, and decrees. Appeals: Appeals from Municipal Court not of The law provides that assigned counsel be paid out of the county record heard as trial de novo. fund. Okla. Stat. Ann. Sec. 22 1074 stipulates that counsel appointed to Courts of limited or special Statute: Okla. Sta. Ann. til. 10, Spc. conduct an appeal shall be provided jurisdiction: 24 tit. 11, Sec. 28-110 et. seq.; and compensa tion, as fixed by the judge. Municipal Criminal Court of Record tit. 19, Sec. 137.1 et. seq.

Has original jurisdiction in cases of violation of any city ordinances.

102 National Criminal Drifense Systems Study 'nn

Flat rate or per diem: Oregon County Court

In Sl'me cases, the counties surveyed Counties selected for survey: County courts in Crook, Gilliam, reported the use of the above flat 1. Lane 8. Josephine Harvey, Jefferson, Morrow, rates of compensation. 2. Marion 9. Klamath Sherman, and Wheeler Counties have 3. Washington 10. Linn juvenile jurisdiction. Felony $95 4. Multnomah 11. Benton Misdemeanor $95 5. Clackamas 12. Hook River Municipal courts Appeal 6. Tillamook 13. Umatilla Other 7. Douglas Municipal Court

Expense limits: Court of last resort: Has jurisdiction over regulations of incorporated cities and towns. None. Supreme Court Has concurrent jurisdiction with Expert witnesses: Reasonable fee. Has original jurisdiction to issue Justice Court over non felonious extraordinary writs. traffic cases within municipal boundaries. May hear appeals on petition for review from the Court of Appeals. Magistrates:

Intermediate appellate court: Referees (all counties)

Court of Appeals Handle civil cases.

Has no original jurisdiction. Judge Pro Tempore

Has exclusive appellate jurisdiction. Supreme Court may appoint judge pro tempore when it determines Court of general trial jurisdiction: efficient administration of justice requires it. Circuit Court Each judge pro tempore has same Except where otherwise pt'ovided by authority and duties as a regular law, the Circuit Court has original judge of the court to which he or she jurisdiction in all matters. is assigned.

Has appellate jurisdiction over cases Defense services to indigent.s from all courts of limited jurisdiction except the District StatutoI'y scheme Court. On January 1, 1983, the indigent Tax Court defense system in Oregon shifted from a county-organized, county­ Courts of limited or special funded to a county-organized, state­ jurisdiction: funded system.

District Court However, counties retained their option to create a public defender, Has jurisdiction in all misdemeanor assigned c0unsel, or contract system. cases where potential punishment is not more than 1 year imprisonment Under the new system the State or a $3,000 fine, and over all Supreme Court through the State non felonious traffic cases. Court Administrator is responsible Has concurrent jurisdiction with for overseeing the system. Municipal Court in municipal charter viola tions. Statute: Or. Rev. Stat. Sec. 151.010 et. seq. Justice Court Actual system Has jurisdiction in misdemeanor cases and nonfelonious traffic cases. At the time of our survey, 13 counties were served by a public

National Criminal D£j"ense Systems Study 103 Appendix C

!3ig bb LIe b * H 14 N defender program, 20 by an assigned In some counties, informal limits are Pennsylvania counsel system, and three by a imposed. contract system. Counties selected for survey: Appeals (hourly rate): 1. Allegheny 9. Snyder Our present information is that this 2. Philadelphia 10. Dauphin system has changed very little since No distinction between in-court and 3. Montgomery 11. Lancaster January 1, 1983. out-of-court. 4. Crawford 12. Chester 5. Washington 13. Lehigh Appellate representation is provided Out-of court $30 6. Armstrong 14. Lackawanna by a state appellate organization In-court $30 7. Cambria 15. Bucks distinct from the local programs. Maximum 8. Blair 16.Delaware

Costs Flat rate or per diem: Court of last resort:

As of January 1, 1983, all costs of None. Supreme Court indigent defense services are the responsibility of the State. No statutory provision for flat rate Original jurisdiction to issue all or per diem reimbursement. necessary writs. At the time of our survey all costs except for the State appellate Expense limits: May assume plenary jurisdiction over program were paid for by the any matter pending before any court counties. Pursuant to the statute cited above, if it involves an issue of immediate "the person for whom counsel has public importance. Total costs by source: been appointed is entitled to State $582,000 reasonable expenses for Has exclusive jurisdiction over County $12,057,051 investigation, preparation and appeals from the general trial courts Other presentation of the case." (i.e., Court of Common Pleas) in, Total $12,639,051 among other cases: Such person or their counsel must o felonious homocide The entire State expenditure was for secure approval and authorization of o direct criminal contempt the State appellate defender pro­ payment of such expenses as the o constitutional matters. gram. court finds are "necessary and proper," including but not limited to Has exclusive jurisdiction from all Assigned council rates travel, telephone, reproduction of final orders of the Commonwealth documents, and expert witness fees. Court, entered as original decisions Rates set by statute and judge in tha t court. discretion. May review any decision of the two Or. Re. Stat. Sec. 135.055 stipulates intermediate appellate courts. that appointed counsel shall, by order of the court and subject to the Intermediate appellate court: approval of the governing body of the county, be paid fair Superior Court compensation for representation. Such compensation is payable at a Has original jurisdiction in mandamus and prohibition to trial rate not less than the hourly rate courts, and habeas corpus only when reported below. such actions are ancillary to those Hourly rate: under appeal.

Out-of-court $30 Has exclusive appellate jurisdiction In-court $30 over final orders of Court of Common Pleas, except when such Maximums: orders are within exclusive juris­ dictions of Supreme Court or Total compensation payable is Commonwealth Court. subject to the review of the presiding judge, who shall certify Commonwealth Court that such payment is fair compensa tion. Same original jurisdiction as noted above for the Superior Court.

104 National Criminal DefellSe Systems Study , ·2 iV! If '¥@ ,8 -k

With the exception of those cases Municipal courts: Actual system reserved for the Supreme Court, it has exclusive appellate jurisdiction Philadelphia Municipal Court While all 67 counties are required to in, among other cases, all criminal have public defenders, the majority actions. Jurisdiction as: of counties are rural and meet their o committing magistrate in all obligation through part-time public Court of general trial jurisdiction: criminal matters defenders and part-time assistants. I) all criminal offenses with Court of' Common Pleas maximum prison sentence of 5 years, Costs including indictable offenses under There are 59 judicial districts. The the vehicle laws All costs of indigent defense services court may have specialized divisions. o summary offenses with maximum in Pennsylvania are provided by the jail term of 90 days counties. Criminal Division in Alleghany o com missioners jurisdiction to set County handles all criminal matters, and accept bail and issue warrants. Total costs by source: both felony and misdemeanor. State Philadelphia Traffic Court County $21,235,197 Trial Division in Philadelphia handles Other $100,000 some criminal cases, but misde­ Jurisdiction over all summary Total $21,335,197 meanors are heard in Philadelphia offenses arising under State Vehicle Municipal Court. Code and all ordinances enacted Assigned counsel ra tes pursuant to that code. Family Division handles all juvenile Rates set by statute, cusi0m in matters. Magistrates: jurisdiction, and judge discretion.

Where court has no specialized All courts have Masters, Pa. Stat. Ann. tit. 19, Sec. 1501 sets divisions, it hears those cases as a Commissioners, and Referees, whose specific fees for murder cases. whole. duties are left to the discretion of the appointing judge. P.A. Stat. Ann. tit. 16, Sec. 9960.7 Has appellate jurisdiction over authorizes appointment of the certain administrative agencies and Defense services to indigents private bar in non murder cases and orders of minor judiciary. the award of reasonable Statutory scheme compensation by the appointing Courts of limited or special judge. jurisdiction: By State statute each of Pennsylvania's 67 counties is Hourly rate: Community Court required to establish a public defender, appointed by the Board of Hourly fees of $15 to $25 were the If established, it supplants County Commissioners. most common reported in the survey. jurisdiction of District Justice Court and would have same jurisdiction. Two or more counties may cooperate au t-o f-court in the appointment of a public Capital case only: $25 Pittsburgh Magistrates Court defender. Other: $15 Has jurisdiction over all ordinance Specific duties of the public In-court violations and traffic offenses. defender extend from "critical Capital case only: $35 pretrial identification procedures" to Othen $25 May hold preliminary hearing and appellate levelS, and encompass commit defendant to jail pending juvenile, mental health, Maximums: bindover. parole/probation revocation, and extradition proceedings. The statute provides a procedure for District Justices Court payment in excess of the limits The statute provides for the because of extraordinary Except as otherwise provided, has appointment by the court of circumstances. jurisdiction in sum mary offenses, attorneys other than the public except for traffic. defender. Capital case: 1 atty. $2,000 May preside at arraignments and set Statute: Pa. Stat. Ann. tit. 16, Sec. 2 attys. $2,500 bail. 9960.3 et. seq. (murder case) Felony $800 May hear misdemeanors of third Misdemeanor $500 class if defendant pleads guilty. Other: Juvenile $500

National Criminal Dqfi!l1se Systems Study 105 Appendix C

amp . ¥ME ·M¥7&%

Appeals: Rhode Island Probate Court Out-of-court In-court All five counties contacted by Probate jurisdiction, which includes Maximum $500 survey. mental commitments.

Flat rate or per diem: Court of last resort: Municipal courts:

None. Supreme Court Municipal Court

Expense limits: Empowered to issue prerogative Original jurisdiction in municipal writs and has other original ordinance violations. Court Tit. 19, Sec. 791"Assigned counsel jurisdiction as granted by law. primarily handles parkinI:\' violations. may also make written ex parte request to obtain investigative, Has final and revisory appellate Magistra tes: expert, or other services necessary jurisdiction over all questions of law to an adequate defense. Upon and equity. District Court Bail Com missioners finding after proper inquiry that such services are necessary, the court Has jurisdiction in petitions for trialS Bail Commissioners are justices of shall authorize counsel to obtain and new trials, appeals and certifi­ the peace who are authorized to set such services on behalf of a defend­ cations to the Court, and in special bail, and, in default of bail, commit ant. The court may, in its discre­ cases in which adversaries concur in to jail. tion, ratify their procurement if the stating questions for the opinion of court finds that timely procurement the court. Defense services to indigents could not await prior authorization." Intermediate appellate court: Statutory scheme Higher limits are authorized for murder cases (19, Sec. 784). None. By statute, a statewide office of public defender is created. Investigators $300 Court of general trial jurisdiction: Expert witnesses $300 The Governor, with the advice and Transcripts Superior Court consent of the Senate, appoints the Social services public defender to a 3-year term. Travel Has' original juriSdiction in all Total crimes, misdemeanors, and offenses Statute: R.I. Gen. Laws Sec. 12-15-1 except as otherwise provided by et. seq., Sec. 14-1-31. law. All indictments by grand juries are returned to the Superior Court. Actual system

Has appellate jurisdiction as The State public defender program provided by law; hears appeals from operates out of regional offices and District and Probate Courts. serves all five counties in the State.

Courts of limited or special Costs jurisdiction: All funds for indigent defensp. Family Court services in Rhode Island are furnished by the Sta teo Has jurisdiction over delinquency and CHINS cases. Total costs by source: State $1,299,684 District Court County Other Has jurisdiction over ordinllnce Total $1,299,684 violations. Assigned counsel ra tes Has original jurisdiction over offenses punishable by a fine of not Rates set by custom in jurisdiction, more than $500 or 1 year imprison­ court rule statewide, and judge ment. discretion. May issue habeas corpus. Supreme Judicial Court sets ['ate.

106 National Criminal Defense Svstems Study Wilili 5 51 *M gos;w¥@

Hourly rate: South Carolina Courts of limited or special Out-of court $20 jUi'lsdictlon: In-court: Counties selected for survey: (felony) $30 L Greenville 9., Laurens Family court (other) $25 2. Richland 10. Dorchester 3. Charleston 11. Sum tel' Jurisdiction over all juvenile mental Maximums: 4. Spartanburg 12. Cherokee commitments. 5. Anderson 13. Lancaster These figures represent guidelines, 6. Aiken 14. Florence Probate Court not absolute maximums: 7. Beaufort 15. Dillon 8. Lexington Probate cases, including adult Capital case mental commitments. Felony: Court of last resort: (very serious) $2,000 Magistrate's Court (less serious) $1,000 Supreme Court Misdemeanor: Among other cases, has jurisdiction (Superior Court) $500 Has jurisdiction to issue all writs. in all criminal cases where the pen­ (District Court) $200 alty does not exceed $200 fine or 30 Other: Has appellate jurisdiction in all days imprisonment. (Juvenile) $1,500 Chancery cases for both questions of law and fact. Authorized to issue search and arrest Appeals: warrants for suspected gambling Out-of-court In law cases, can hear appeals on operations. In-court certiorari. Maximum $750 Municipal courts: Death sentences are appealed Flat rate or per diem: directly to the Supreme Court. Municipal Court

None. Intermediate appellate court: Has same jurisdiction as Magistrate Court. Expense limits: Court of appeals Has jurisdiction over municipal Investiga tors: May grant injunctions and remedial ordinance violations. Apparently little writs for proper exercise of its used by assigned jurisdic tions. Magistrates: counsel. Expert witnesses $100 Has appellate jurisdiction over all Circuit Court Special Mast.:!rs (day or any criminal cases appealed from the portion) Circuit Court and Family Court, and None. in postconviction proceedings, ex­ There is broad discretion in cept where the death penalty has Defense services to indigents approving individual vouchers for been imposed. necessary expenses throughout the Statutory scheme State. Court of general trial jurisdiction: By statute in South Carolina, a Circuit Court public defender system can be created in any county by a majority Has original jurisdiction in all cases vote of the attorneys in the county unless exclusive jurisdiction is who are adm itted to practice in granted to another court. Civil South Carolina and whose principal cases are heard in the Court of office is located in the county. Common Pleas Division and criminal Further provisions permit one public cases are heard in the General defender program to serve two or Sessions Division. more counties. Has appellate jurisdiction over If no public defender program is Probate, Magistrates, and Municipal created, the county establishes an Courts. assigned counsel program or a contract program with private attorneys. statute: S.C. Code Sec. 17-3-10, 17- 3-60.

National Criminal Defense Systems Study 107 Appendix C

AMYl! . aw ...... me '¥Meo Actual system Maximums: South Dakota Capital case $750 There are 46 counties in South Felony $500 Counties selected for survey: Carolina. Misdemeanor $500 1. Pennington 9. Edmunds Other * 2. Minnehaha 10. Jerauld Seven counties have ad hoc assigned 3. Brown 11. Davison counsel systems. *Mental commitment $50/case when 4. Butte 12. Day there is a hearing; $10 when there is 5. Shannon 13. Codington By vote of the local bar, public no hearing. Committee appointed by 6. Corson 14. Brookings defender systems have been estab­ statute prescribes. 7. Walworth 15. Turner lished in 39 counties. 8. Tripp 16. Yankton By statute, where more than one Three of these public defender private counsel is appointed to Court of last resort: programs ser've more than one represent a person, the combined fee county. shall not exceed the maximum. Supreme Court

In Greenville County there is both a Appeals: Supreme Court or any justice may public defender and contract Out-of-court $10 issue any original or remedial writ. program. In-court $15 Maximum $500 Has appellate jurisdiction as Costs provided by legislature. Right to Flat rate or per diem: appeal is mandatory. Criminal The State provides $265.53 per 1,000 review may include sentence review. population for each county program. No statutory provision for flat rate or per diem reimbursement. Intermediate appellate court: In addition, the State provides separate funds for private counsel in Expense limits: None. death penalty cases as well as State funds for expenses of both public None. Court of general trial jurisdiction: defenders and private attorneys. S.C. Code Sec. 17-3-80 stipulates Circuit Court The State also provides funds for that appointed counsel shall be mental health cases and an appellate reimbursed for necessary expenses Original jurisdiction includes the defender program. actually incurred, provided that they following: are approved by the trial judge. o exclusive original jurisdiction in all All other costs are the responsibility felony cases of the counties. By Supreme Court Rule 7 expenses G concurrent jurisdiction with are allowed only for fees of expert magistrate in misdemeanors and Total costs by source: witnesses, cost of scientific tests or ordinance violations State $1,708,244* exhibits for trial demonstrations, I) proceedings relating to minors. County $1,690,109 costs of psychiatric examination, and Other extraordinary travel expenses. May issue and determine all writs. Total $3,398,353 No other expenses are allowed. Has appellate jurisdiction over *state contribution includes Magistrate Court. $456,477 in funding for the state The only cost restriction is the appellate program. limited State budget for expenses. Courts of limited or special Assigned counsel ra tes jurisdiction:

Rates set by statute and court rule None. statewide. Municipal courts: All fees and maximums as reported below are established by S.C. Code None. Sec. 17-3-50. Magistrates: Limitations relating to expenses are set out by Supreme Court Rule 7. Circuit Court Magistrates

Hourly rate: Form Magistrate Court-may be lay Out-of-court $10 magistrates or law-trained magis­ In-court $15 trates.

108 National Criminal Defense Systems Study '9 ,,'bNB kriMtifi5W &AU 1# it ;ip Me! "BI' I! t Ii' All magistrates may: Total costs by source: Flat rate or per diem: o issue al'rest and search warrants State o handle preliminary hearings County $1,352,047 None. Gl accept guilty pleas and impose Other sentences in criminal cases where Total $1,352,047 Expense limits: penalty is a fine of not more than Investiga tors $100 or 30 days. Assigned counsel rates Expert witnesses Transcripts $1.50/ Lawyer Magistrates are courts of Rates set by court rule statewide page record and may try the following and judge discretion. Social services cases: Travel o misdemeanors and ordinance S.D.G.S. Codified Laws Ann. Sec. Total violations 23A-40-S states that assigned o mental commitments. counsel shall be paid a reasonable S.D.G.S. Sec. 23A-40-S specifies that and just compensation for their appointed counsel shall be paid for Nonlawyer magistrates are not services plus expenses and other necessary expenses and costs inci­ courts of record and cannot try costs incident to the proceedings. dent to the proceedings in an amount cases. to be fixed by the presiding judge of Fee guidelines are set by the the circuit court or the magistrate. Defense services to indigents Supreme Court in consultation with the bar. Statutory scheme Payment of requested fees is at South Dakota General Statutes discretion of sitting judge. Chapters 7-16A and 23A-40 J;ive authority to the Board of County Hourly rate: Commissioners of each county and Out-of-court $30 governing body of any municipality In-court $40 to provide representation to indi­ gents either through establishing and These figures represent the rates maintaining a public defender office, most commonly reported for the arranging with the courts to appoint counties surveyed. attorneys through a coordinated, systematic plan, or a combination of Maximums: these two systems. Capital case Felony $200- Public Defender offices may be $500 maintained singly or jointly by Misdemeanor $100- several counties and shall be moni­ $200 tored by advisory committees. Other* $100 Statute: S.D. Compo Laws Ann. Sec. These figures represent the ranges of 7-16A-1 et. seq. maximums reported by the counties surveyed. Actual system *Parole revocation, limit set in Sec. Public defender programs are in 23A-40-S. oper'ation in only two of South Dakota's 66 counties. Appeals (hourly rate): Out-of-court $30 The other counties are served by In-court $40 assigned counsel programs. Maximums

Costs S.D. Codified Laws Ann. Sec. 23A- 40-9 stipulates that the presiding All costs of indigent defense services judge of the circuit court shall allow are provided by the counties. a reasonable and just sum for serv­ ices rendered and for necessary costs and expenses in any appeal to the Supreme Court.

National Criminal Dif'e/lSe Systems Study 109 ------~------

Appendix C

I; « ;rea b 5 ¥ &iN fim B'ritmm Nki!iiiJIi

Tennessee Like circuit court, has de novo Trial Court Special Masters appellate jurisdiction over lower Counties selected for survey: courts. Empowered to eonduct heal'ings, 1. Shelby 10. Rutherford take evidence, and report to ap­ 2. Davidson 11. Warren Chancery Court pointing court on particulal' issues. 3. Hamilton 12. Putnam 4. Knox 13. Roane Courts of limited or special Empowered to issue subpoenas. 5. Obion 14. McMinn jurisdiction: 6. Weakley 15. Grainger Defense services to indigents 7. Henderson 16. Greene County Court 8. Montgomery 17. Washington Statutory scheme 9. Maury Has original jurisdiction in, among other cases, the following: Under Tennessee statute, "Every Court of last resort: o juvenile (unless judge is not a person accused of any crime or lawyer and there is potential misdemeanor whatsoever is entitled Supreme Court confinement) to counsel in all matters necessary o competency hearings. for his defense as well as to facts as Has no original jUrisdiction. to law." Ceneral Sessions Court Hears appeals from both Courts of The statute permits the appointment Appeal and "bypass" appeals, in Can hear misdemeanors if defendant of a public defender or the creation which there was no testimonial pleads guilty or waives a jury trial. of an assigned counselor contract conflict in the trial court. program. A fine of not more than $50 can be Intermediate appellate court: imposed. Statute: Tenn. Code Ann. Sec. 40- 2002 et. seq. Court of Appeals Probate Court Actual system Hears civil appeals. Juvenile Court Only four of Tennessee's 95 counties Court of Criminal Appeals: Has been established in 16 counties. are served by a public defender pro­ gram. Like the Court of Appeals, it has no Where established, has jurisdiction original jurisdiction. over juvenile cases usually handled Eighty-three are served by an by county court. assigned counsel system and eight by Has appellate jurisdiction over all a contract system. criminal cases, habeas corpus, and Trial Justice Court postconviction proceedings, extra­ Costs dition, and criminal contempt. Criminal jurisdiction in cases carrying a fine of no more than $50 Virtually all of the county funds If sole issue concerns constitution­ or a sentence of 11 months, 29 days. available for indigent defense ality of a statute or ordinance, it services in the Sta te occur in Shelby does not have jurisdiction. Municipal courts: and Davidson Counties.

Court of general trial jurisdiction: Municipal Court All other funds are supplied by the State. Circuit Court Jurisdiction over municipal ordinances. Total costs by source: There are 31 judicial districts. State $2,054,782 Jurisdiction over other offenses County $1,529,560 Has jurisdiction over all criminal where fine does not exceed $50. Other $148,538 cases, unless another court is Total $3,732,880 expressly given jUrisdiction. Magistrates: Assigned counsel rates Criminal Court Trial Court Commissioners Rates set by statute, custom in There are 13 such courts. Empowered to issue subpoenas and jurisdiction, and judge discretion, take depositions. Has concurrent criminal jurisdiction Tenn. Code Ann. Sec. 40-2023 sets with circuit court. rates and limits for compensation.

110 National Criminal De}ellse Systems Study 'WP kM "i01.\i!OOO2IU = #! H I ef 'hh ::r::w:: The statute states that appointed Texas Court of limited or special counsel shall be entitled to jUrisdiction: reasonable compensation for their Counties selected for survey: services within the specified limits. 1. Bexar 11. Cameron County Court: 2. Tarrant 12. Williamson Hourly rate (felonies only): 3. Dallas 13. Montague Has exclusive original jurisdiction Out-of court $20 4. Harris 14. Freestone over all misdemeanors involving In-court $30 5. El Paso 15. Kaufman fines of less than $200 or a jail 6. Lamb 16. Brazoria sentence. These figures represent the rates 7. Dickens 17. Van Zandt most com monly reported for the 8. Frio 18. Jefferson Criminal jUrisdiction does not exist counties surveyed. 9. Wilbarger 19. Red River when there is a Criminal District 10. Travis Court. Maximums: * Capital case Court of last resort: May issue habeas corpus where Felony $500 authority conferred by the District Misdemeanor $500 Supreme Court Court. Other Has original jurisdiction to issue all Has de novo appellate jurisdiction *Compensation in all capital cases writs. over Municipal and Justice Courts. shall be a reasonab13 amount deter­ mined by the appropriate appellate Has statewide final appellate Justice of Peace Court court. jurisdiction in civil and juvenile cases only. Has original jurisdiction in criminal Appeals (hourly rate): cases where fine does not exceed Out-of-court Court of Criminal Appeals: $500. In-court Maximum $500 Has original jurisdiction to issue May issue warrants and conduct writs of habeas corpus and other preliminary hearings. This figure represents the maximum writs necessary to its jurisdiction. compensation allowable for services Municipal courts: rendered in both the Court of Has statewide final appellate juris­ Criminal Appeals and the Supreme diction in all criminal cases. Municipal Court Court. Intermediate appellate court: Has original and exclusive juris­ Flat rate or per diem: diction over ordinance Violations Felony $100/day Court of Civil Appeals (primarily traffic cases). Misdemeanor $lOO/day Appeal Has intermediate appellate juris­ Has concurrent jurisdiction with Other $50/day diction in civil cases only. Justice of Peace Courts in violations (juvenile) of State law within city limits, Court of general trial jUrisdiction: where fine does not exceed $200. Per diem limits may be exceeded only in capital cases. District Court Magistra tes:

Expense limits: Has original jurisdiction in all Criminal Court of Appeals felonies. Commissioner None. Most District Courts exercise both Duties as Court directs. Counsel is entitled to reimbursement civil and criminal jurisdiction, but in for reasonable and necessary Metropolitan areas may have Defense services to indigents expenses in accordance with the specialized divisions. rules of the Supreme Court. Statutory scheme Several have been designated as Criminal District Courts, although By sta tute, indigent defendants have some include delinquency cases. the right to counsel who shall be appointed by the court and paid from Several Family District Courts have the general fund of each county. been created. One county, Tarrant, has special District Courts have appellate statutory authority for a public jurisdiction in probate matters and defender system. (Tex. Rev. Civ. other administrative cases. Stat. Ann. art. 341-1)

National Criminal Drifense Systems Study 111 Appendix C

, DiC#4!U, ==n" "R' j # 'if fflI 4',:;::;::::a statute: Tex. Stat. Ann. arts. 341-1 Flat rate or pel' diem: Utah et. seq. In court only: Counties selected for survey: Actual system Capital case $50/day 1. Utah 7. Tooele (minimum) 2. Salt Lake 8. Iron Only two of Texas' 254 counties are Misdemeanor $50/day 3. Davis 9. Sevier served by a public defender program. (minimum) 4. Weber 10. Summit Appeal 5. Cache 11. Carbon The other 252 operate an assigned Other $50/day 6. Box Elder 12. Grand cuunsel syste m. (minimum) Court of last resort: Costs Expense lim its: lnvestiga tors $500 Supreme Court All costs of indigent defense services Expert witnesses $500 in Texas are the responsibility of Transcripts Has original jurisdiction to issue county government. Social services extraordinary writs. Travel Total costs by source: Has final appellate jUrisdiction in all State Pursuant to the statute cited above, cases. County $19,286,780 attorneys may be paid a reasonable Other fee set by the court for expenses Intermediate appellate court: Total $19,286,780 incurred for purposes of investi­ gation and expert testimony, not to None. Assigned counsel ra tes exceed the amount reported above. Court of general trial jUrisdiction: Rates set by statute, custom in jurisdiction, and judge discretion. District Court

Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. Has original jurisdiction in all 16.05, Sec. 1 establishes allowable criminal and civil matters not levels of compensation, as reported excepted by constitution or law. below. Has appellate jurisdiction over all The statute also provides for judicial appeals from courts of limited discretion in setting reasonable fees jurisdiction. in excess of the specified minimums. Appeals from Juvenile Court are Hourly rate: heard in District Court unless a direct appeal is allowed by the None. Supreme Court.

Minimums: Courts of limited or special Capital case $250/day jurisdiction: (In-coUl't) Felony $50/day Circuit Court Misdemeanor $50/day Other $50/day May exercise criminal jurisdiction in (habeas corpus) violations of municipal ordinances With judges discretion can be paid at and in all misdemeanors. higher amount. Justice Court

Reported consistent usage of the Has criminal jurisdiction in Class B daily rate as the maximum. and C misdemeanors punishable by a fine of less than $300 or not more Appeals: than $300 or 6 months imprisonment. Out-of court Juvenile Court In-court $350 Minimum Has original jurisdiction in matters Minimum $500 for appeal of a death involving children, which includes penalty case. delinquents and CHINS.

112 National Criminal Defense Systems Study Win 65P

Municipal courts: Hourly rate: Vermont Ou t-of-court: None. Felony $25 All 14 counties contacted for survey. Misde meanor $20 Magistrates: Court of last resort: In-court: Juvenile Court Referee Felony $30 Supreme Court Misdemeanor $25 May hear any case in court's juris­ May issue all necessary writs in aid diction in the first instance and These rates are those most of appellate jurisdiction. report findings and recommendations commonly reported in the survey. to the court. Exercises appellate jurisdiction in all Maximums: cases, civil and criminal. Defense services to indigents None. Intermediate appellate court: statutory scheme Appeals (hourly rate): None. utah General Statutes authorizes the Out-of-court $25 governing bodiee of counties or In-court $30 Court of general trial jurisdidion: municipalities to appoint counselor Maximum provide representation for indigent ~erior Court defendants through legal aid or other Flat rate or per diem: associations. Has original jurisdiction for criminal None. offenses. statutes: Utah Code Ann. Sec. 77- 64-1 et. seq. Expense limits: May issue necessary writs. Investiga tors Actual system Expert witnesses Courts of limited or special Transcripts jurisdiction: At the time of the survey, 17 Social services counties in Utah were served by Travel $I5/hr. District Court public defender programs and the .20/mile remaining 12 by contract systems. Total Has criminal jurisdiction in felonies where maximum penalty is less than Costs utah Code Ann. Sec. 77-64-1 life imprisonment, in misdemeanors, stipulates that counties should and in municipal ordinance viola­ Virtually all costs of indigent provide investigatory and other tions. defense services in Utah are the facilities necessary for a complete responsibility of the counties. defense. Has juvenile jurisdiction.

Total costs by source: Sec. 77-64-5 states that transcripts Hears mental commitment cases. State $32,500 shall be paid for by the county. County $1,605,667 Probate Court Other $161,900 Total $1,800,067 Municipal courts:

Assigned council ra tes None.

Rates set by custom in jurisdiction Magistrates: and judge discretion. None. Utah Code Ann. Sec. 77-32-6 stipu­ lates that the governing bodies of Statutory scheme counties, cities, and towns shall authorize courts to award reasonable The Office of Defender General is compensation and expenses to ap­ established by Chapter 163, Sub­ pointed counsel. chapter 3, of the Vermont State laws T.13 Sec. 5251. The statute describes the Defender General's primary responsibility to provide needy persons with legal services under this chapter.

National Ctiminal Defense Systems Study 113 Appendix C

. 4 fi Ft ill it' en h

He or she may provide these services apr;>roving expenses and assisting Virginia personally, through public defenders with legal strategy. employed by the Office of the f'ounties selected for survey: Defender General, or through Hourly rate: 1. Fairfax 10. Prince William attorneys-at-law involved in a Out-of-court $25* 2. Grayson 11. Henrico contractual arrangement with the In-court $25* 3. Montgomery 12. Richmond Office of the Defender General. :+: 4. Roanoke 13. Sussex When an assigned counsel contract 5. Norfolk 14. Newport News The Defender General may establish has a conflict, an ad hoc appoint­ 6. Agusta 15. Suffolk offices to carry out his or her ment is made at this hourly rate. 7. Albemarle 16. Virginia Beach responsibilities; each public defender 8. Culpeper 17. Pittsylvania office shall be headed by a public Prior to the above-cited change in 9. Arlington defender selected by the Defender the system attorneys were paid at a General. rate of $15 an hour. Court of last resort:

Statute: Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, Sec. Maximums: Supreme Court 5251 et. seq. Capital case Felony $700 Original jt:.isdiction to issue all Actual system Misdemeanor $500 writs. Other Vermont has a statewide public Appellate jurisdiction over all defense system, with an Office of These figures represent the C{)nstitutional questions. the Defender General in Montpelier maximum compensation allowable and eight field offices located for attorneys appointed to handle Direct appeal is permitted from a throughout the Sta teo conflicts encountered by contract final order or judgment from lower assigned counsel. courts. Four contract offices provide representa tion in the other six Prior to the establishment of the Intermediate appellate court: counties. new system, ad hoc assigned counsel were paid a maximum of $500 for a None. There is also a separate appellate felony case and $300 for a defender program in Vermont. misdemeanor case. Court of general trial jurisdiction:

Costs Appeals: Circuit Court

All costs of indigent defense service!: None. May issue mandamus prohibition and in Vermont are the responsibility of certiorari to lower courts. the State. Flat rate or per diem: Has original jurisdiction in all Total costs by source: None. indictments for felonies and in State $1,873,264 presentations, information, and County Expense limits: indictments for misdemeanors. Other Total $1,873,264 None. Has jurisdiction in juvenile cases involving murder where juvenile is Assigned counsel ra tes Investigators waived to adult court. EXPfilrt witnesses Rates set by custom in jurisdiction, Transcripts Has appellate jurisdiction over lower judge discreUon, and assigned coun­ Social services courts. sel coordinator. Travel $I5/hr. .20 mile Courts of limited or special Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13 Sec. 5205 Total jurisdiction: states that the court assigning a case shall prescribe a reasona~le rate of The above-cited statute also stipu­ General District Court compensation for the attorney's lates that the assigning court shall services hased on the complexity of determine the direct expenses, nec­ Conducts preliminary examinations the issues, the time involved, and essary to representation, for which in felony cases. other relevant considerations. an attorney should be reimbursed. Exclusive original jurisdiction in Act. No. 146 1981 Adj. session The Assigned Counsel Coordinator is misdemeanors and municipal ordi­ estabUshed an assigned counsel now responsible for review of all nance violations. contract systam with an assigned voup-hers submitted by assigned counsel coordinator responsible for counsel, including expenses.

114 National Criminal Defense Systems Study Has juvenile jurisdiction unless a Total costs by source: Washington Juvenile and Domestic Relations State $8,751,353 Court has been created. County Counties selpcted for survey: Other $24,958 1. Snohom ish 8. ThUrston Juvenile and Domestic Relations Total $8,776,311 2. King 9. Kitsap Court 3. Pierce 10. San Juan Assigned counsel rates 4. Spokane 11. Skagit Exclusive jurisdiction, where 5. Clark 12. Grant created, in juvenile and fam ily Rates set by statute, court rule 6. Yakima 13. Adams matters. statewide, and judge discretion. 7. Pacific 14. Pend Oreille

Municipal courts: Va. Code Section 19.2-163 stipulates Court of last resort: tha t appointed counsel shall be None. compensated for their services in an Supreme Court amount fixed by the courts, not to Magistrates: exceed the specified maximums as Has original jurisdiction to issue and reported below. determine extraordinary writs. Have various duties, including: (I) issuance of arrest and search As of April 6, 1983, the statutory Has appellate jurisdiction in all warrants maximums have been superseded by cases, except civil actions involving e bail Supreme Court rule, pursuant to the less than $200. o if authorized, acceptance of guilty Appropriations Act effective as of pleas in Class 4 misdemeanors, and that date. Intermediate appellate court: imposition of fines up to $100. Hourly rate: Court of Appeals Defense services to ~ndigents None. Has no original jurisdiction. statutory scheme Maximums: Has exclusive appellate jurisdiction The Virginia statute provides for a Capital case* $600 in all but dea th penalty cases. Public Defender Commission, whose Felony: duties include the appointment of (20 yrs.) $382 Court of general trial jurisdiction: public defenders in selected areas (20 yrs.) $191 set out by statute, all of whom are Misdemeanor $72- Superior Court full-time. $96 Other Has exclusive original jurisdiction in The statute also provides for State criminal and juvenile cases, except funding for indigent defense in all See attached sheet for amended where concurrent with District State-initiated proceedings, with schedule of fees, effective April 6, COllrt, Justice of Peace Court, and compensation for services fixed by 1983. Municipal Court in cities over each of the courts in accordance 400,000 population. with a specific fee schedule. Appeals: Has appellate jurisdiction over cases Statute: Va. Code Sec. 19.2-163.1 Discretion of Supreme Court. in trial courts. et. seq. Flat rate or per diem: Courts of limited or special Actual system jurisdiction: None. The public defender program cur­ District Court rently operates in four locations. Expense limits: Has concurrent jurisdiction with All of these four public defenders The circuit or district court shall Superior Court and Municipal Court are full-time. direct the payment of such reason­ in cities with more than 400,000 able expenses as it deems appro­ population in misdemeanors, viola­ The courts rely on the ad hoc priate under the circumstances of tions of city ordinances, and pro­ appointment of counsel in the the case. ceedings to keep peace. Cannot remaining 99 counties. impose sentence of more than $500 and/or 6 months of imprisonment. Costs Municipal Department (where cre­ All costs of indigent defense services ated) hears ordinance violations and in Virginia are provided by the State. traffic cases.

National Cdminal Defense Systems Study 115 Appendix C

'ti' to w g ; 6 it f *. Uti kt * i-.,m

Justice of the Peace Court (exists Actual system Maximums: only in Columbia County) Capital case At the time of our survey, 6 counties Felony $1,000- Has same jurisdiction as District were served by public defender $2,500 Court. programs, 31 by assigned counsel Misdemeanor $200- programs, and 2 by contract pro·· $500 Hears all traffic cases. grams. Other

Municipal courts: Costs There are no specified statewide maximum limits. Municipal Court Apart from funds available to the separate State appellate defender These figures represent the ranges of Where exists, has exclusive original agency, the State contributes little maximums most commonly reported jurisdiction in all city ordinance money to indigent defense services. for the counties surveyed. violations. The counties contribute virtually all Appeals: In cities over 400,000 population, has of the funds. concurrent jurisdiction as District None. Court in cases there enumerated. The counties provide the vast major­ ity of funds for local program opera­ Flat rate or per diem: Magistrates: tion. At least one county is reported to Superior Court Commissioner The State funds the State appellate compensate for representation in defender program. juvenile court on a flat rate basis. May perform duties of judge in Chambers. Total costs by source: Expense limits: State $727,625* Superior Court Referee County $12,022,991 None. Other $1,925,178 Superior Court Judge Pro Tempore Total $14,675,794 Expenses are allowed on a case-by­ case basis; see comment under May try cases as a judge. *State contribution includes "Rates set by:" above. $500,000 in funding for the Sta te Justice of Peace and District Court Appellate Program. Judge Pro Tempore Assigned counsel rates May sit as judge. Rates set by judge discretion. Municipal Court Judge Pro Tempore Wash. Rev. Code Ann. Sec. 10 01.110 May sit as judge. stipulates that appointed counsel shall be entitled to reasonable fees Justice of Peace and District Court and actual expenses necessarily Commissioner incurred, to be fixed by appointing court. Have same authority as judge in criminal cases. Sec. 4.88.330 states that the Supreme Court will determine Defense services to indigents reasonable fees and travel expenses for representation on appeal. Statutory scheme In addition, in some counties the Washington's enabling statute defender director sets the rate of permits the board(s) of county compensation. commissioners of one or more counties to establish a public Hourly rate: defender office. Out-of-court $30 In-court $30 Authority also exists for the creation of an assigned counsel system or These figures represent the rate contract system. most commonly reported for the counties surveyed. Statute: Wash. Rev. Code Sec. 36.26.010 et. seq.

116 National Criminal Defense Systems Study ya)W4

west Virginia Municipal courts: W. Va. Code Sec. 51-11-8 sets rates and limits within which appointed Counties selected for survey: Municipal Court counsel shall be compensated for 1. Kanawha 9. Calhoun actual and necessary services 2. Wayne 10. Randolph Has jurisdiction over ordinance rendered, as reported below. 3. Wyoming 11. Marshall violations. 4. Cabell 12. Hancock The circuit cou·:t shall fix the award 5. Putnam 13. Marion Magistrates: for services and expenses. 6. Raleigh 14. Barbour 7. Fayette 15. Hampshire Circuit Court Commissioner Hourly rate: 8. Jackson Out-of-court $20 Power to take depositions. In-court $25 Court of last resort: Circuit Court Juvenile Referee Maximums: Supreme Court Capital case $1,000 Holds detention hearings. Felony $1,000 Has original jurisdiction in all Misdemeanor $1,000 extraordinary writs. Circuit Court Special Judge Other $1,000

Appellate jurisdiction extends to Judge pro tern. Appeals (hourly rate): criminal cases where there is a Out-of-court $20 felony or misdemeanor conviction in Defense services to indigents In-court $25 the Circuit Court, or where Circuit Maximum $1,000 Court has affirmed a conviction Statutory scheme imposed by a lower court. Flat rate or per diem: As a result of legislation passed in Intermediate appellate court: 1981, the State created a West None. Virginia Public Legal Services None. Council. Expense limits: Investigators Court of general trial jurisdiction: The Council was charged with estab­ Expert witnesses lishing public defender offices in Transcripts Circuit Court certain judicial districts and Social services overseeing the assigned counsel Travel Has original jurisdiction in all crimes system in the rest of the State. Total $500 and misdemeanors. statute: W. Va. Code Sec. 29-21-1 Pursuant to the above-cited statute, Has original jurisdiction in habeas et. seq. attorney expenses, including but not corpus, mandamus, quo warrants, limited tv necessary travel expenses, prohibition, and certiorari. Actual system transcripts, investigative services, and expert witnesses shall be reim­ Appeals from Magistrate Court are At the time of the study, the public bursed up to the maximum amount heard de novo. defender programs were not yet in reported above, unless the attorney existence and all 55 counties obtains advance approval from the Courts of limited or special operated under an assigned counsel court to incur expenses in a larger jurisdiction: system. sum.

Magistrate Court Costs

Has jurisdiction in misdemeanor All costs of indigent defense services cases. in West Virginia are the responsi­ bility of the State. Conducts preliminary examinations in felony cases. Total costs by source: State $2,951,655 May issue arrest warrants. County Other Except in capital cases, may set and Total $2,951,655 admit to bail. Assigned counsel rates

Rates set by statute and judge discretion.

National Criminal Defonse Systems Study 117 Appendix C

" al ilit§!I., ¥ §6,¥G; fi- RWd-' Wisconsin Magistrates: Hourly rate: Out-of-court $25 Counties contacted for survey: Court Commissioner In-court $35 1. Dane 9. Green 2. Milwaukee 10. Columbia Performs duties as established by Maximums: 3. Waukesha 11. Marinette Appointing Court. 4. Douglas 12. Winnebago None. 5. Barron 13. Dodge Performs various duties as 6. La Crosse 14. Racine prescribed by the Court. The only restriction on compensation 7. Monroe 15. Ozaukee for appointed counsel is the possible 8. Marathon 16. Calumet Defense services to indigents limit on available State funds.

Court of last resort: Statutory scheme Appeals: Out-of-court $25 Supreme Court Under Wisconsin law, a statewide In-court $35 public defender system is created to Maximum Has original jurisdiction in cases of provide both a public defender and statewide concern. assigned counsel system for all Flat rate or per diem: indigent cases (appeal, felony, May issue all writs. misdemeanor, juvenile delinquency, None. juvenile status matters, mental Has appellate jurisdiction by petition commitment, probation and parole Expense limits: for review from decisions of Court revocation, certain contempt cases of Appeals, or on a petition to by­ and so-called special proceedings The statute contains no provisions pass Court of Appeals. such as habeas corpus and extra­ regarding reimbursement for diction cases.) attorney expenses. Intermediate appellate court: The public defender appoints either The State Public Defender Adminis­ Court of Appeals staff counselor private counsel (at trative Rules Sec. 2.12 states that least 25% of the cases) in all coun­ the public defender shall make May issue all writs. ties. available to private attorneys the services of staff investigators, or Appeal of right from Circuit Court Statute: Wis. Stat. Ann. Sec. 15,78, shall authorize the attorney to retain decisions al'e heard by Court of Sec. 977.05 et. seq. such investigatory services as may Appeals. reasonably be required. Actual system Court of general trial jurisdiction: If expert assistance is required, the As of the date of this survey 47 of attorney must apply to the State Circuit Court Wisconsin's 72 counties were served public defender for permission to by a public defender office and the retain such assistance. Has original jurisdiction in all remaining 25 by an assigned counsel criminal and civil matters. program.

May have divisions (e.g., Juvenile, Costs Family, Probate, etc.). All of the funds for indigent defense Appellate jurisdiction over Municipal services in Wisconsin are the respon­ Court. sibility of the State.

Courts of limited or special Total costs by source: jurisdiction: State $13,350,200 County None. Other Total $13,350,200 Municipal courts: Assigned counsel rates Municipal Court *Pursuant to Wis. Stat. Ann. Sec. Hears municipal ordinance 977.08(4) the payment schedule for violations. appointed counsel is set by the Wisconsin State Public Defender Board.

118 National Criminal Deftnse Systems Study , ** 1M 'MUM if e'iS

Wyoming Magistrates: are the responsibility of the coun­ ties. Counties contacted for survey: District and County Court 1. Natrona 6. Washakie Commissioners Total costs by source: 2. Laramie 7. Albany State $1,030,578 3. Sweetwater 8. Sheridan In District Court, have authority as County $175,004 4. Lincoln 9. Campbell judge "in chambers." May determine Other 5. Fremont 10. Goshen cases of insanity 01' mental incom­ Total $1,205,582 petency. In juvenile cases, may Court of last resort: conduct detention hearings, but may Assigned counsel rates not make final order. Supreme Court Rates set by custom in jurisdiction In County Court, may conduct ar­ and judge discretion. Has original jurisdiction to issue all raignments in misdemeanor cases writs. and initial appearances in felony Wyo. Stat. Sec. 7-115 states that the cases, issue warrants, and set bail. appointing court shall prescribe a Has general appellate jurisdiction in reasonable rate of compensation for all criminal and civil matters. Defense services to indigents attorney services, with regard to the "complexity of issues, time involved, Intermediate appellate court: Statutory scheme prevailing local fees of attor- neys ••• and other relevant considera­ None. The Governor is mandated to estab­ tion ••• " lish one or more public defender Court of general trial jurisdiction: districts having boundaries coexten­ Hourly rate: sive with the boundaries of one or Out-of-court $40 District Court more judicial districts. In-court $40

Has original jurisdiction in all The designation of these public No "in-court/out of court" criminal cases, and all law and defender districts is to be based on distinction. equity cases. case load statistics, geographical characteristics, and other relevant These figures represent the most Can issue all writ'). factors. commonly reported rate for the counties surveyed. Has appellate jurisdiction over The Governor is also mandated to courts of limited jurisdiction. appoint public defenders to each Maximums: district after receiving recommen­ Courts of limited or special dations from the district judge Maximums are not specified in jurisdiction: within the district. statute.

County Court The Governor has appointed one Appeals: statewide public defender with the Has jurisdiction over all responsibility of administering the No specified rates or limits misdemeanors. program on a statewide basis. statewide.

Justice of the Peace Court Statute: Wy. Stat. Sec. 7-1-109 et. Flat rate or per diem: seq. Has jurisdiction in public offenses None. below grade of felony in which Actual system punishment does not exceed a $750 Expense limits: fine or 6 months imprisonment. Theoretically, public defender staff services are available in all of Pursuant to the above-cited statute, Municipal courts: Wyoming's 23 counties. the appointing court shall reimburse direct expenses necessary to Municipal Court However, in many of the sparsely repl'esen ta tion. populated areas great reliance is Jurisdiction limited to municipal placed upon the appointment of ordinance violations punishable by a private attorneys. maximum fine of $200 or 90 days imprisonment. Costs

Eighty-five percent of 11 indigent defense services in the State are the responsibility of the Sta te and 15%

~u.s. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, 1986-282-478.40024 National Criminal Dt:fense Systems Study 119 Announcing the new

and graphS tatistical tables S t ry text Fa t-Finding with explana 0 __- Specialized directories or ,..--is._!ii.l8l!lIIIiiIIIIIIiI_---,ations Crime trend information Service over a period of time

Need a specialized Examples of reports: Call NCJRS with your request. An o statistical tables and graphs with information specialist will estimate report-one tailor­ explanatory text: the cost. We can begin work as soon as we have your approvaL made just for you? o State-by-State program or legis­ lative information presented in Call toll free for more information: an easy-to-read format: National Criminal Justice Refer­ The National Criminal Justice Ref­ o specialized directories or listings ence Service sponsored by the Na­ erence Service's new Fact-Finding of justice agencies. organiza­ tional Institute of Justice Service is your solution. Get tions, or instructions: answers to your hard-to-find crimi­ 800-851-3420 nal justice questions in a report o crime trend information over a tailored just for you. specified period of time. Justice Statistics Clearinghouse sponsored by the Bureau of Justice Statistics We'll gather the facts and figures Prices: using BJS resources, NCJRS re­ Your cost for the Fact-Finding 800-732-3277 sources, professional associations. Service covers actual expenses news articles, juvenile justice agen­ only. Prices are determined by the .J uvenile Justice Clearinghouse cies, or whatever it takes to find the time needed to respond to your re­ sponsored by the Office of Juvenile answers. We then send you a full qLlest. A request that requires up to Justice and Delinquency Prevention report that matches your specifk 5 hours could cost between $75 and needs. S250. 800-638-8736 Suppose you needed

to knowo <> 0 Now you can have the answers to these and other burglary questions at your fingertips with the Criminal Justice Information Package­ Burglary Statistics. This innovative package produced by the Bureau of Justice Statistics/ National Criminal Justice Reference Service contains: o Descriptions of the two major sources of burglary statistics: the FBI's Uniforn1 Crime Reports and the Bureau of Justice Statis­ tics' National Crime Survey. This succinct narrative also an­ The Criminal Justice Information on burglary occurrences and Package-Burglary Statistics will swers some of the most com­ trends. The issues are Household monly asked questions about prove an invaluable resource to Burglary (February 1985) and minimize time and effort spent in burglary and gives sources for Households Touched by Crime, the data. locating data you need for your 1984 (June 1985). everyday operations. The Informa­ (,) Two issues of the Bureau ofJus­ a A list of printed sources for tion Package is available for $10. tice Statistics Bulletin, each one further research. Use the form below to order your packed with current information () Contacts and referrals. Burglary Statistics package today!

Please send me Criminal Justice Information Package # I-Burglary Statistics I I Name:, ______I I Organization: ______. ______I I Address: ______I I City, State, ZIP; ______I I I Telephone (include area code): ______I I Method of Payment I Payment of $10 check or money order enc losed I I Please bill my: I NCJRS Deposit Account I I #_------I Credit Card o VISA o MasterCard I I #------Signature Exp. date ______Government Purchase Order (Add $1 .95 for processing purchase orders) #_------~I If sending a check or money order, please use an envelope. FOLD, TAPE, AND MAIL. DO NOT STAPLE.

PLACE FIRST CLASS STAMP HERE

NCJRS Dept. F-ABX Box 6000 Rockville, MD 20850

Or call 800-732-3277 for further information (251-5500 in metropolitan D.C.) 3ureau of Justice Statistics reports Corrections Privacy and security reVised October 1986) 8JS bullet/ns and special reports: Computer crime: Call toll-free 800-732-3277 (local State and Federal prisoners, 1925-85, 8JS speCial reporls: ~51-5500) to order BJS reports, to be added NCJ-l02494, 10/86 Electronic fund transfer frraud, NCJ.g6666, 3/85 oone of the BJS mailing lists, or to speak Prisoners .In 1985, NCJ-l01384, 6/86 Electronic fund transfer and crime, o a reference specialist in statistics at the Prison admission and releases, 1 983, NCJ-92650, 2/84 lustice Statistics Clearinghouse, National NCJ-l00582,3/86 Electronic fund transfer fraud, NCJ-l00461 , Capital punishment 1 984, NCJ-98399, 8/85 4/86 ~riminal Justice Reference Service, Examining recidivism, NCJ-96501, 2/85 30x 6000, Rockville, MD 20850. Single Computer security techniques, Returning to prison, NCJ-95700, 11/84 NCJ-84049, 9/82 '~Pies of reports are free; use NCJ number Time served In prison, NCJ-93924, 6/84 Electronic fund transfer systems and crime, order. Postage and handling are charged Historical corrections statistics in the U,S., 1 850- NCJ-83736, 9/82 r bulk orders of single reports. For single 1984, NCJ-l02529, 10/86 Expert witness manual, NCJ-77927,9/81 oPies of multiple titles, up to 10 titles are Prisoners in State and Federal Institulions on Criminal justice resource manual, NCJ-61550, ee; 11-40 titles $10; more than 40, $20; Dec. 31, 1983, NCJ-99861, 6/86 12179 Capital puniShment 1 984 (final), NCJ-99562, 5/86 braries call for special rates. Privacy and security of criminal history Capital pUnishment 1983 (final), NCJ-99561, 4/86 .~ Public-use tapes of BJS data sets and information: Ither criminal Justice data are available 1979 surveyof inmales of Siale correct/onal facilities Compendium of State fegislation, 1984 ~om the Criminal Justice Archive and and 1979 census of Siale correctional/acilitles: overview, NCJ-98077, 9/85 hformation Network, P.O. Box 1248, Ann 8JS special reporls: Criminal justice Information policy: ~rbor, MI48106 (313-763-5010). The prevalence of Imprisonment, NCJ·93657. Crime control and criminal records (BJS special 7/85 report), NCJ-99176, 10/85 ~ational Crime Survey Career patterns in crime, NCJ-88672, 6/83 State criminal records repositories (BJS friminal vi~timization in the U,S.: BJS bullellns: technical report), NCJ-99017, 10/85 , 1984 (final reporll. NCJ-l00435. 5/86 Prisoners and drugs, NCJ-87575, 3/83 Data quality of criminal history records, NCJ- 1983 (final report). NCJ-96459. 10/85 Prisoners and alcohol, NCJ-86223, 1/83 98079, 10/85 I 1982 (fmal report). NCJ·92820, 11/84 Prisons and prisoners, NCJ-80697, 2/82 Intel1lgence and Investigative records, : 1973-82 trends, NCJ-90541. 9/83 Veterans In prison, NCJ-79232, 11/81 NCJ-95787,4/85 1980 (final report). NCJ-84015. 4/83 Victim/witness legislation: An overview, Census 0/ jails and survey of Jail inmates: 1979 (final report). NCJ-76710. 12/81 NCJ-94365, 12/84 Jail inmates, 1984, NCJ-l01094. 5/86 Information policy and crime control strategies jJS special reports: Jail inmates. 1983 (BJS bullelin), NCJ-99175, (SEARCH/BJS conference), NCJ-93926, Preventin9 domestic violence against women, 11/85 10/84 NCJ-l 02037. 8/86 The 1983 jail census (BJS bulle lin), NCJ-95536. Research access to criminal justice data, Crime prevention measures, NCJ-1Q0438.3/86 11/84 NCJ·84154, 2/83 The use of weapons in committing crimes, Census of jails, 1978: Data for indiVidual Jails, Privacy and Juvenile Justice records, NCJ-99643. 1/86 vols I-IV, Northeast. North Central, South. West. NCJ-84152,l/83 Reporting crimes to the police, NCJ-99432. NCJ-72279-72282. 12/81 Survey of State laws (BJS bulletin), 12/85 Profile of jail inmates, 1978, NCJ·65412, 2/81 NCJ-80836, 6/82 Locating city, suburban, and rural crime, NCJ- Privacy and the private employer, 99535. 12/85 Children in custody: NCJ-79651, 11/81 The risk of violent crime, NCJ-97119. 5/85 Public juvenile facilities, 1985 (bulletin). The economic cost of crime to victims, NCJ- NCJ-l02457.10/86 General 93450.4/84 1982-83 census of juvenile detention anti Family violence, NCJ-93449. 4/84 8JS bulletins: correctional facilities, NCJ-l01686. 9/86 Police employment and expenditure, lJS bulle tins: NCJ-l00117.2/86 Households touched by crime, 1 985, Expenditure and employment Tracking offenders: The child vlcllm, NCJ- NCJ-l01685.6/86 BJS 8ulletlns: 95785, 12/84 Criminal victimization, 1984, NCJ-98904. 10/85 Justice expenditure and employment: The severity of crime, NCJ-92326, 1/84 The crime of rape, NCJ-96777. 3/85 1983, NCJ-l01776. 7/86 The American response to crime: An overview Household burglary, NCJ-96021. 1/85 1982, NCJ-98327. 8/85 of criminal Justice systems, NCJ-91936, 12/83 Criminal victimization, 1 983, NCJ-93869. 6/84 Justice expenditure and employment in the U.S.: Tracking offenders, NCJ-91572, 11/83 Violent crime by strangers, NCJ-80829. 4/82 Victim and witness assistance: New State Crime and the elderly, NCJ-79614, 1/82 1980 and 1981 extracts, NCJ-96007. 6/85 1971-79, NCJ-92596. 11/84 laws and the system's response, NCJ-87934, Measuring crime, NCJ-75710. 2/81 5/83 tesponse to screening questions in the National Courts 1986 directory of automated criminal Justice Crime Survey (BJS technical report), NCJ- information systems, NCJ-l02260, 10/86 97624,7/85 8JS bulletins: The 9rowth of appeals: 1973-83 trends, Sourcebook of criminal Justice stalistlcs, 1985, 'ictimization and fear of crime: World NCJ-l00899,10/86 perspectives, NCJ-93872, 1/85 NCJ-96381, 2/85 Case filin9s in State courts 1983, NCJ-95111, Crime and justice facts, 1985, NCJ-l00757, 5/86 11e National Crime Survey: Working papers. Bureau of Justice Statistics annual report, fiscal vol. I: Current and hlstoncal perspectives, 10/84 8JS special reports: 1985, NCJ-l 00182, 4/86 NCJ-75374,8/82 National survey of crime severity, NCJ-96017, vol. II: Methological studies, NCJ-90307, 12/84 Felony case-processing time, NCJ-l 01985,8/86 Felony sentencin9 in 18 local 10/85 ssues in the measurement of crime, Criminal victimization of District of Columbia NCJ-74682.10/81 jurisdictions, NCJ-97681. 6/85 The prevalence of 9uilty pleas, NCJ-96018, residents and Capitol Hill employees, 1982-83, 'he cost of negligence: Losses from prevenlable NCJ.g7982;Summary, NCJ-98567; 9/85 household burglaries. NCJ-53527, 12/79 12/84 Sentencin9 practices in 13 States, NCJ-95399, The DC crime victimization study Implementation, tape victimization in 26 American cities, NCJ-98595, 9/85,$7.60 domestlc/$9.20 Canadi­ NCJ-55878, 8179 10/84 Criminal defense systems: A national an/$12.80 foreign :riminal victimizatiori in urban schools, The DC household victimization survey data base: NCJ-56396, 8179 survey, NCJ-94630, 8/84 Habeas corpus, NCJ-92948, 3/84 Documentation, NCJ-98596, $6.40/$8.40/$11 In introduction to the National Crime Survey, User manual, NCJ-98597, $8,20/$9.80/$12.80 NCJ-43732, 4178 State court caseload statistics, 1977 and 1981, NCJ-87587, 2/83 BJS telephone contacts '85, NCJ-98292, 8/85 .ocal viclim surveys: A review of the Issues, How to gain access to BJS data (brOChure), National criminal defense systems study,NCJ- NCJ-39973, 8177 BC-000022, 9/84 94702. 10/86 Proceedings of the 2nd workshop on law and 'arole and probation The prosecution of felony arrests: justice statistics, 1984, NCJ-93310, 8/84 lJS bulletins: 1981, NCJ-l01380, 9/86 Report to the nation on crime and justice: Probation and parole 1984, NCJ-l00181. 1 980, NCJ-97684. 10/85 The data, NCJ-87068, 10/83 2/86 1979, NCJ-86482, 5/84 Dictionllry of criminal justice data terminology: Setting prison terms, NCJ-76218, 8/83 State court model statistical dictionary, 2nd ed., NCJ-76939, 2/82 'arole in the U,S., 1980 and 1981, NCJ-87387, Supplement, NCJ-98326, 9/85 Technical standards for machine-readable data 3/86 1 st edition, NCJ-62320, 9/80 supplied to BJS, NCJ-75318, 6/81 :haracteristics of persons entering parole State court or9anization 1980, NCJ-76711, 7/82 during 1978 and 1979, NCJ-87243, 5/83 A cross-city comparison of felony case :haracteristics of the parole population, 1 978, processing, NCJ-55171, 7179 NCJ-66479, 4/81 'arole In the U,S., 1979, NCJ-69562,3/81 Federal offenses and offenders 8JS special reporls: Pretrial release and misconduct, NCJ-96132, 1/85 8JS bulletins: Bank robbery, NCJ-94463, 8/84 See order form Federal drug law violators, NCJ-92692, 2/84 Federal justice statistics, NCJ-80814, 3/82 on last page Please put me on the mailing list for: National Crime Survey reports-the only Justice expenditure and employment regUlar national survey of crime victims reports-annual spending and staffing by Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics Federal/State/local governments and by (annual)-broad-based data from 150+ function (police, courts, etc.) sources (400+ tables, 100+ figures, index) Computer crime reports-electronic fund transfer system crimes The National Institute of Justice/National Privacy and security of criminal history Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) information and information policy-new abstracts documents published in the criminal legislation; maintaining and releasing justice field. Persons registered with the Ref­ intelligence and investigative records; data erence Service receive NIJ Reports every other quality issues month. It includes an order form for Bureau of Federal statistics--data describing Fedenl Justice Statistics publications. If you are not case processing, from investigation through registered with NCJRS and wish to be, please prosecution, adjudication, and corrections check here: BJS bulletins and special reports-timely _ to receive a registration form. reports of the most current justice data Courts reports-State court case load sur­ To receive copies of recent BJS reports, list veys, model annual State reports, State titles and NCJ numbers here or check them on court organization surveys reverse side: Corrections reports-results of sample sur­ veys and censuses of jails, prisons, parole, probation, and other corrections data

Name: Title: Organization: Street or box: City, State, Zip: Telephone: Interest in criminal justice:

U.S. Department of Justice Place Bureau of Justice Statistics stamp Washington, DC 20531 here

Justice Statistics Clearinghouse/NCJRS U.S. Department of Justice User Services Department 2 Box 6000 Rockville, MD 20850 The Bureau of Ju~tice Stati~tic~ (8.1S), in conjunction with the Na­ tional Criminal Justice Reference Service (NC J RS), announce~ the e~tabl bhment of the Justice Statis­ tics Clearinghouse. The Clearing­ house toll-free number is: o Suggesting referrals to other sources for criminal justice statis­ 800-732-3277 tics. [f the Clearinghouse doesn't have the answer. an information Persons from Maryland and the specialist will refer you to agencie~ Washington, D.C., metropolitan or individuals who do. area should call J() 1-251-55()O. o Conducting custom literature Services offered by the Clearing­ searches of the NC.JRS document house include: data base. We can search the NCJRS data base and provide topi­ o Responding to statistical re­ cal bibliographic citations and quests. How many rapes are re­ abstracts to answer specific re­ ported to the police'! How many <.Jue~ts. burglaries occurred in the pa~t year'! Call the Ckaringhouse. toll free. o Collecting statistical reports. You have 24-hour access to the The Clearinghouse collects statisti­ Justice Statistics Clearinghouse. e Providing information about cal reports from numerous sources. From8:JOa.m. to8:00p.m. EST, BJS services. Interested in receiv­ Submit statistical documents to weekdays, an information specialist ing BJS documents and products'? share with criminal justice col­ is available. After work hours. you Register with rhe BJS mailing list leagues to: NCJRS, Attention BJS may record your orders or kave a by calling the Clearinghouse, toll AC<.Juisition, Box 6000, Rockville, messagl.! for an information special­ free. MD 20850. ist to return your call.