Privatizing Due Process: Issues in the Comparison of Assigned Counsel, Public Defender, and Contracted Indigent Defense Systems

1991 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 390-418 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alissa Pollitz Worden
Free Justice ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 57-85
Author(s):  
Sara Mayeux

Using a case study of Massachusetts, this chapter traces a shift between the 1930s and the 1950s in how elite lawyers framed the problem of indigent defense—from a problem for private charity to a constitutional right requiring public support. By the 1930s, lawyers in several cities had established voluntary defender organizations as a private charitable alternative to the public defender. Meanwhile, a series of Supreme Court cases, interpreting the due process requirement of the Fourteenth Amendment, steadily expanded the constitutional right to counsel in criminal trials, culminating in the 1942 decision of Betts v. Brady. Voluntary defenders typically had volatile funding, and lawyers increasingly worried that these private organizations lacked adequate resources to fulfill the expanding constitutional mandate to provide counsel for indigent defendants. By the 1950s, many lawyers worried that private charity was inadequate to satisfy a constitutional right, and increasingly viewed the public defender as preferable to the voluntary defender.


Free Justice ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 24-56
Author(s):  
Sara Mayeux

This chapter describes Progressive Era debates within the legal profession over proposals to establish a “public defender” in the criminal courts—a public official who would represent criminal defendants and counterbalance the public prosecutor. It describes different versions of the public defender idea, as developed by California lawyer Clara Foltz, New York lawyer Mayer Goldman, and the prominent Massachusetts lawyer Reginald Heber Smith, author of Justice and the Poor. Leaders of the bar, often affiliated with corporate law firms, expressed concerns that the public defender represented a step towards socialization of the legal profession. Instead, they preferred to handle indigent defense and other forms of legal aid through private charity. In 1917, New York lawyers rejected proposals for a government-controlled public defender and instead established a criminal branch of the Legal Aid Society.


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Yotam Shem-Tov

Most criminal defendants cannot afford to hire an attorney. To provide constitutionally mandated legal services, states commonly use either private court-appointed attorneys or a public defender organization. This paper investigates the relative efficacy of these two modes of indigent defense by comparing outcomes of co-defendants assigned to different types of attorneys within the same case. Using data from San Francisco, I show that in multiple defendant cases public defender assignment is plausibly as good as random. I find that public defenders reduce the probability of any prison sentence by 22% and the length of prison sentences by 10%.


1985 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sidney C. Snellenburg

Free Justice ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
Sara Mayeux

Today, thousands of public defenders around the United States represent indigent defendants in criminal proceedings. At a moment of widespread concern about mass incarceration and racial and class inequality, public defenders are seen both as participants in, and adversaries of, the carceral state. The introduction to this book provides an overview of how public defenders became so widespread in American courtrooms. At the turn of the twentieth century, many elite lawyers expressed skepticism about the public defender. They posited that the legal profession should remain independent from the state as much as possible, and that indigent defense was better handled by private charity. They established voluntary defender organizations. But by the 1960s, prevailing views had changed. Many elite lawyers now endorsed the public defender, especially after the Supreme Court decided the landmark case of Gideon v. Wainwright, which expanded the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. The book argues that these developments can be explained by shifts in liberalism and how lawyers conceived of the profession’s place within liberal democracy.


1995 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert L. Spangenberg ◽  
Marea L. Beeman

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document