Download
1 / 62
620 likes | 738 Views
Indigent Defense 2012 & Beyond. V.G. Young Institute School For County Officials February 9, 2012 College Station. James Bethke , Texas Indigent Defense Commission. www.txcourts.gov/tidc. The right to counsel is required by the U.S. Constitution and Texas law.
E N D
Indigent Defense 2012 & Beyond V.G. Young Institute School For County Officials February 9, 2012 College Station James Bethke, Texas Indigent Defense Commission
The right to counsel is required by the U.S. Constitution and Texas law. It is NOT discretionary.
Sixth Amendment 1791
Powell v. Alabama 1932
Betts v. Brady 1942
"If an obscure Florida convict named Clarence Earl Gideon had not sat down in prison with a pencil and paper to write a letter to the Supreme Court; and if the Supreme Court had not taken the trouble to look at the merits in that one crude petition among all the bundles of mail it must receive every day, the vast machinery of American law would have gone on functioning undisturbed. But Gideon did write that letter; the court did look into his case; he was re-tried with the help of competent defense counsel; found not guilty and released from prison after two years of punishment for a crime he did not commit. And the whole course of legal history has been changed." Robert F. Kennedy
Gideon v. Wainwright 1963
Gideon vs. Wainwright In our adversary system of criminal justice…. With government “quite properly” spending “vast sums of money to establish machinery to try defendants accused of crime”.....you need ….. “procedural and substantive safeguard designed to assure fair trials before impartial tribunals in which defendants stands equal before the law” “This noble ideal cannot be realized if the poor man charged with crime has to face his accusers without a lawyer to assist him.” Gideon v. Wainwright, 373 US 335 (1963)
In Re Gault 1967
Argersingerv.Hamlin 1972
First Comprehensive Statewide • Funding • Rules & Reporting • State Body to Assist
Long-term Short-term Intermediate Determine effectiveness of policies and recommend changes to maintain and improve the effectiveness of the public defense systems Implement basic standards and reporting requirements Set and administer grant funding program Develop operational performance standards for public defense services Original Goals of 2001/2002 Page 3
Williamson County Case Filed in 2006 / Argued before the Supreme Court of Texas 11/ 6/11. Petitioners Allege: ‘Systematic denial in county courts at law of right to counsel They were discouraged from requesting counsel They were informed that they would not qualify for appointed counsel if their families were able to raise bond money. The county ‘provide[s] inaccurate information about the ability to qualify for counsel and encourage[s] accused persons to waive their right to counsel without adequate information.’
my running story T A C
Screening & Verification Overview Private counsel retained magistration Appoint counsel No Yes Is counsel requested? Does person qualify for counsel? Pre-Trial assists w/& verifies financial affidavit magistration Private counsel retained Yes Yes No Pre-Trial Services used before magistration? Arrest Does person qualify for counsel? Appoint counsel Yes Magistrate assists w/& verifies financial affidavit Yes No Is counsel requested? Private counsel retained magistration No No Private counsel retained
ART. 26.05, CCP Compensation of Counsel Appointed
Reasonable • Schedule of Fees • Necessary Overhead
2012 AND BEYOND
