A lesson by Street Law, Inc.
Chasing Gideon: Issues in Public Defense
Overview
Students explore the right to
counsel by reading a case
study and identifying
problems in our public
criminal defense systems.
They then suggest and
analyze solutions to address
these problems.
1.
2.
3.
4.
This lesson
can be used in:
Government, law,
and history classes.
Language arts
classes.
Connections to national
standards
Civics & Government: III, D. What is the
place of law in the American constitutional
system? (2. Judicial protection of the rights
of individuals)
Common Core: Reading informational
texts, Collaborative discussions on texts,
Integration of knowledge and ideas.
Introduction (25 minutes)
Identifying Systemic Issues with Public Defense (35 minutes)
Suggesting and Analyzing Solutions (30 minutes)
Reporting and Debrief (20 minutes)
Outcomes
As a result of this lesson, students will be able to:
 Describe the right to counsel and the government’s role in appointing an attorney to
defendants in criminal cases who cannot afford to hire one.
 Identify challenges to providing effective assistance of counsel to those accused of crimes.
 Suggest and analyze solutions to address problems in providing public defense.
About this Lesson
This lesson is based on the book CHASING GIDEON: The Elusive Quest for Poor People’s Justice by
Karen Houppert, © 2013 by Karen Houppert, published by The New Press. The creation and
distribution of this lesson was funded by The New Press. Learn more about Chasing Gideon at
www.gideonat50.org.
You may want to teach this lesson over two class periods. A logical break comes between Sections 2
(Identifying Issues) and 3 (Suggesting Solutions). Suggested extension activities are described at the
end of this plan. This lesson plan assumes student background knowledge in the basics of the
criminal justice system. Like many law-related lessons, this could be enhanced with the participation
of a community resource person. You can reach out to your local bar association or to the National
© 2013 Street Law, Inc.
1
Chasing Gideon: Issues in Indigent Defense
Legal Aid & Defender Association (NLADA) to ask for help finding a lawyer with experience in
public defense. At NLADA, contact Mark Houldin, Defender Counsel, at m.houldin@nlada.org for
assistance identifying public defenders in your community. If you invite an attorney to participate, be
sure to send this lesson plan ahead of time and discuss the role you want the attorney to take in
supporting the activities.
Materials needed
 Copies of Handouts 1, 3, and 5 for all students.
 Handout 2: Graphic Organizers (transparency to project/display or copies to give all
students)
 One copy of Handout 4, cut into strips
 Large blank newsprint or flip chart paper or copies of the blank Graphic Organizers in
Handout 2
Handouts & transparencies
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Public Defense (or Right to Counsel) Background
Transparency: Sample Graphic Organizer and Handout: Blank Graphic Organizers
Sean’s Story (adapted from Chasing Gideon)
State Responses to the Issues
Solutions – Pro and Con Analysis
Preparing to teach
 Preview Defending Gideon video (available at: http://gideonat50.org/media/defending-gideon)
and prepare the video to start at 26:25.
 Cover these vocabulary terms if your students are not familiar with them: counsel,
prosecutor, defendant, indigent.
Introduction (25 minutes)
1. Ask students to imagine that they or a family member had been arrested and charged with a
crime. Who would they want to talk to, what would they want to know?
2. Next, ask students to think about what qualities they would want in the lawyer who will
represent them throughout the criminal justice process. Ask the students to think to themselves
and write down a short list of these qualities. Then, instruct the students to turn to a partner to
compare the two lists. Ask the whole class: which qualities are most commonly listed, and why
were those qualities important?
© 2013 Street Law, Inc.
2
Chasing Gideon: Issues in Indigent Defense
3. Tell students that the “right to counsel,” guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, is very important
to our democracy. The Supreme Court has ruled that everyone charged with a serious crime (one
where there is a possible jail sentence) has a right to counsel, even if they cannot afford a lawyer.
This is because the Court has ruled that a fundamentally fair criminal justice system requires all
players to have legal assistance. This means that the government must provide a lawyer for
defendants who cannot hire their own.
4. One of the most important Supreme Court rulings about the right to counsel was Gideon v.
Wainwright. In this case, the Supreme Court said: “Governments, both state and federal . . .
spend vast sums of money to . . . try defendants accused of crime . . . Similarly, there are few
defendants charged with crime, few indeed, who fail to hire the best lawyers they can get to
prepare and present their defenses.” Ask students what this statement indicates about the
importance of having a lawyer.
5. What difference might an attorney make in a criminal defendant’s case? Invite students to
answer. Mention the following, if not raised by students:
 The Supreme Court noted the following possible consequences: Even well-educated
people may know nothing about the practice of law; a defendant might not be able to
determine whether an indictment is good or bad, not know the rules of evidence, not be
able to object when the prosecution does something wrong, and might not make his case
in the most convincing way possible. In short, innocent people might be convicted
without the assistance of an attorney.
6. Tell students:
 Today, we will learn about how the government provides a lawyer for people who cannot
afford it. We will explore some of the challenges the system faces and work to generate
solutions.
 The right to counsel also means defendants have a right to a competent lawyer—
someone who can represent them effectively. One of the challenges with providing
lawyers for defendants is money. In many places, state or local governments are not
providing enough funding to pay well-prepared lawyers to take on these cases. In other
places, there are simply too few lawyers being paid to do the work. This sometimes results
in ineffective assistance of counsel – a legal term meaning that the lawyer did not do a good
enough job representing the defendant.
7. Show video: Defending Gideon. Start the video at 26:25 until 29:19 (the end of the film). Discuss
the clip with students. Use these prompts if you wish:
 The first speaker said we can “judge the character of a society …by how you treat
the poor, the incarcerated, the condemned, the accused.” Do you agree? What does
he think about our society’s commitment to the rule of law?
© 2013 Street Law, Inc.
3
Chasing Gideon: Issues in Indigent Defense
 One speaker talked about what it really means to have a lawyer assigned to a case.
How does she believe we should define assistance of counsel?
 One speaker mentioned government spending. If there isn’t enough money in the
government’s budget to do everything, where should the government prioritize
indigent defense? How important is it compared to other public needs?
8. Distribute Handout 1: Public Defense Background, and ask students to read silently. Check
for understanding by calling on four or five students in quick succession to each list one (and
only one) fact presented in the document. Remind them to list facts, not inferences or opinions.
Identifying Systemic Issues with Public Defense (35 minutes)
9. Tell the students that they will now explore one defendant’s story, as they work to learn more
about the challenges present in our systems for providing public defense.
10. Explain the activity: In small groups, they will read a case study. As they read, they should
identify problems they see with the public defense system and map them on a graphic organizer.
They can also add any additional problems they are aware of.
11. Discuss the strategy students should use while reading the case study and identifying systemic
issues. As they find problems, they must also look at the causes and consequences of those
problems.
12. Show the students the sample graphic organizer and explain that there can be several causes
and consequences for each problem.
 Consequences are what happen as a result of the problem. To identify the possible
consequences of a problem, ask “So what?”
 Causes are the underlying reason(s) for the problem. To identify the causes of a problem,
ask “Why?”
Walk the students through the example on the sample graphic organizer and make sure they all
understand their task.
13. Put students in groups of three or four and give each group a large piece of blank newsprint or
flip chart paper, or several copies of the blank graphic organizer. Tell the groups to choose a
reporter, a recorder, and a timekeeper.
14. Distribute Handout 2: Sean’s Story.
15. Give students about 20 minutes to read Sean’s Story and work in their groups identifying and
mapping the problems, causes, and consequences.
16. Reconvene the class and post the groups’ graphic organizers around the room. Ask the students
to walk along the posted organizers and look at the problems, causes and consequences
© 2013 Street Law, Inc.
4
Chasing Gideon: Issues in Indigent Defense
identified by the other groups. Tell them to look specifically for problems, causes, or
consequences that differ from the ones their own group listed.
17. Once the students all sit down, call on reporters from a few groups and ask them to describe a
problem they saw on another group’s organizer that their own group had not identified. If you
notice any significant problems missing from the groups’ organizers, discuss them now (see
Teacher’s Guide for a list of possible problems, causes, and consequences).
Suggesting and Analyzing Solutions (30 minutes)
18. Choose four students who are willing to read a short paragraph out loud, and give each of them
one strip from Handout 4: State Responses to Issues. Tell the class that some states have tried to
make reforms to address the problems they identified. Ask each student to read their strip to the
class.
19. Tell the students that they will now work to brainstorm other possible solutions to the problems
with public defense systems. Tell them to try to focus on solutions that attack the underlying
causes of the problems (indicate the bottom third of their graphic organizers). Allow the
students to call out ideas quickly while you (and/or another volunteer) write them on a flip chart
or board. Remind students that they can suggest any ideas, no matter how realistic or workable
they might be. They will have a chance to evaluate the ideas later.
If they have trouble suggesting possible solutions, prompt them with questions or ideas like:





How could we provide more funding to public defense?
How could we make sure that lawyers are prepared and qualified?
What about strategies to bring fewer people into the criminal justice system?
What about requiring new lawyers or law students to do some work on public defense?
What is the role of other government agencies, such as police, judges, prosecutors, in
ensuring lawyers are available and have enough time for each person?
Allow about five minutes for the brainstorming.
20. Now, return the students to their working groups and instruct them to analyze the solutions the
class generated. If there are many proposed solutions, assign some of them to each group. With
fewer ideas, each group can examine all of them. Tell the students that they should discuss each
solution and list the pros and cons they can think of for each. Distribute Handout 5: Pro and
Con Analysis for students to chart their thinking. Allow 15 minutes to work
21. Next, the groups should rank the solutions based on their pro/con analysis. Their most
promising solution should be given #1, the next best #2, and so on. If they wish, they can
modify some of the solutions based on the pros and cons they listed.
© 2013 Street Law, Inc.
5
Chasing Gideon: Issues in Indigent Defense
Reporting and Debrief (20 minutes)
22. Bring the class back together. Ask each group to report on their best solution idea—the one they
gave a #1. Have the groups briefly explain the solution and the reasons why they ranked it the
best. Keep track of the groups’ choices on the board. If more than one group recommends the
same idea as the best, note that as well.
23. After all the groups have reported out, add any of the groups’ second- or third-place ideas to the
list and discuss their merits.
24. Ask the students the following questions about the problems and solutions they identified.
 How do these solutions address both the presence and effectiveness of lawyers who
represent indigent clients?
 One principle of American democracy is the right to a fair trial for people who have been
accused of crimes. In what ways do these proposed solutions improve the fairness of the
criminal justice process? What aspects of fair trials do they not address?
25. Assign students the following task:
Using the solutions identified as best, create a list of “Model Principles for Indigent Defense.”
Your list should include three to five principles or practices you believe states and cities should
always follow when providing indigent defense. For each principle or practice you list, include a
couple of sentences describing it and explain why it is important.
Extensions
 Invite a public defender to visit your class. Have the students prepare interview questions
and allow them to interview the attorney about his or her job. Share the students’ thoughts
about model principles for indigent defense. Invite a prosecutor to visit your class as well,
and ask him or her similar questions.
 Assign students to conduct research to find out what indigent defense system your state,
city, or county uses. Learn which of the students’ suggested solutions are already being
implemented in your area, and write a letter to the appropriate government official
describing which solutions students believe your jurisdiction should try and why.
 Assign students to conduct research to learn about the question of right to counsel in civil
cases. The National Legal Aid & Defender Association
(www.nlada.org/About/About_HistoryCivil#look) and the National Coalition for a Civil
Right to Counsel (www.gideonanniversary.org/about.html) are good places to start. Students
should create a report, slideshow, video, or poster detailing what they learn and share with
their classmates.
© 2013 Street Law, Inc.
6
Chasing Gideon: Issues in Indigent Defense
Additional Resources
 Chasing Gideon, by Karen Houppert. More information at www.Gideonat50.org
 Gideon v. Wainwright on www.LandmarkCases.org: Case background, teaching activities,
decision summaries, and recommended resources.
 Defending Gideon, from the Constitution Project. More information available at
www.Gideonat50.org
 National Interactive Map from the National Legal Aid & Defender Association, available at
www.gideonat50.org/inyourstate
© 2013 Street Law, Inc.
7
Handout 1: Public Defense Background
In Gideon v. Wainwright, the Supreme Court ruled that people accused of serious crimes have the right
to a government-provided lawyer when tried in state courts. But the Court did not address how
states should provide lawyers when defendants cannot afford them. States have struggled to do this
effectively. More people are being prosecuted now than when the Court decided Gideon’s case in
1963, and about 80% of people charged with a serious crime cannot afford a lawyer.
Some cities or states use public defender systems. In this type of system, lawyers work full time
defending indigent clients in a government office. This is often the most expensive system, but the
full-time public defenders become experts in criminal defense and are usually very committed to the
people they represent.
Other states or localities appoint counsel from the community to represent poor people. A judge
appoints a private attorney to represent an indigent defendant in each case where a lawyer is
required. This system can spread the workload around to many attorneys, but sometimes the
appointed lawyers are not experts in criminal defense.
Some jurisdictions use contract attorneys for indigent defense. Governments enter into contracts
with individual attorneys, non-profit organizations, or law firms to provide representation to
defendants who cannot afford a lawyer. Sometimes, the group providing the defense gets a flat fee
for their work, and has no monetary incentive to spend a lot of time or effort on each case.
In any of these systems, the funding for lawyers, paralegals, case investigators, and expert witnesses
comes from the state or local government. While the number of indigent defense cases has gone up
across the country, funding has not typically kept pace. Many taxpayers are not enthusiastic about
providing additional money to pay for the defense of people charged with crimes. However, the
fairness of our justice system depends on everyone having adequate defense.
© 2013 Street Law, Inc.
Transparency and Handout 2: Graphic Organizers
The sample graphic organizer (to be projected or displayed for students as an
example) and the blank graphic organizer (for students to use to map the problems,
causes, and consequences they identify) can be found at:
www.streetlaw.org/chasinggideon.
© 2013 Street Law, Inc.
Page 1 of 2
Handout 3: Sean’s Story
Sean was a typical high school senior. He studied, played video games, and enjoyed having fun with
his friends. Sean had never been in trouble with the law. He aspired to become a police officer some
day. Sean worked hard at his after-school job at McDonald’s. He saved up $1,700 to buy himself an
old, red Mustang for his 18th birthday.
Sean’s dad, Chuck, was proud that his son had earned the money for his own car. As a single dad,
Chuck worked long hours and struggled to support his family financially. When Chuck took his son
to buy insurance for the Mustang, the agent increased the price by $40 due to Chuck’s poor credit
rating. Sean didn’t have the extra money, so he told the insurance agent he would return as soon as
he received his next paycheck.
The Accident
The day after Sean got paid, he drove his new, uninsured Mustang to cash his paycheck. As Sean
approached a cross street, he noticed a Toyota inching out beyond the stop sign to make a left turn.
Sean had the right of way and assumed the other driver would stop. However, the Toyota plowed
into the intersection. Sean wrenched the wheel and slammed on his brakes, but it was too late.
Sean’s Mustang struck the Toyota.
The driver of the Toyota, 85-year-old Lowell, was bleeding from the head. When asked if he was
okay, Lowell nodded and replied, “I think I’m alright.” Although Lowell was taken to the hospital
emergency room for treatment, Sean went home feeling certain that Lowell would be fine. Sean
regretted that he’d been speeding at the time of the crash, but he also figured Lowell should get a
ticket for ignoring the stop sign.
Meanwhile, an emergency room doctor decided that Lowell required surgery and operated
immediately. A week later, Lowell died in the hospital. A police report described the cause of death
as “complications arising out of the injuries sustained in the crash.” The police went to Sean’s home
to inform him that Lowell was dead and Sean was being charged with Vehicular Homicide.
Preparing Sean’s Criminal Defense
Sean’s family couldn’t afford to hire a lawyer. After several weeks, the court finally appointed Sean a
public defender named Carol. Carol had 101 open cases, while the prosecutor in Sean’s case had
only 28. In Carol’s department there were 38 prosecuting attorneys and only 17 public defenders.
The prosecutor’s office was slated to receive $8 million in funding compared with $4 million allotted
to the public defender’s office. So, when prosecutors threatened to go to trial, they actually had the
time and resources to do it. In contrast, public defenders often dealt with excessive caseloads by
persuading frightened clients to accept lousy plea bargains instead of going to trial. A few years ago,
Carol would have stood a good chance of getting Sean’s case dismissed or, at least, getting the
prosecutor to offer Sean a good deal if he’d plead guilty. But, prosecutors had stopped offering
reasonable plea bargains to the clients of overburdened public defenders.
© 2013 Street Law, Inc.
Page 2 of 2
Carol worried that the odds were stacked against Sean. And Sean began to realize that, in spite of his
innocence, he could still be found guilty if Carol couldn’t prepare an effective defense. The prospect
of prison terrorized Sean. He lost his focus, became depressed, and began to experience panic
attacks. Eventually, Sean dropped out of school and earned a GED instead.
Carol frantically juggled other clients’ trials while trying to prepare for Sean’s. Unfortunately, she
didn’t have enough time to conduct the necessary follow-up interviews and investigations. Carol
realized there was no way she’d be properly prepared in time for Sean’s upcoming trial, so she asked
the judge for extra time. The judge denied her request. The trial would start on Monday or he’d hold
Carol in contempt of court. Carol knew that if she proceeded unprepared on Monday, she would
jeopardize Sean’s case. So, she did something very brave. She informed the judge, “I refuse to
conduct a trial for which I am unprepared.” Carol was terrified. Would she be fired? Fined and
jailed? On Monday morning, Carol showed up in court and again pleaded with the judge to delay
Sean’s trial. This time, someone had tipped off a local reporter about the situation. Under close
media scrutiny, the judge granted Carol a three-week extension.
The Trial
Sean’s driving speed was a central issue in his trial. The state’s accident specialist testified that Sean
was exceeding the speed limit by at least 21 mph. This excessive speed, the prosecutor argued,
constituted the “conscious disregard of the danger to others” necessary to prove vehicular homicide.
Sean had admitted he’d been driving “maybe a little fast,” but he denied going anywhere near the
alleged speed range. So, Carol hired a retired state trooper to investigate the accident site. By using
photos the cops had taken of the skid marks and lining them up with other landmarks, Carol’s
investigator discovered the state’s accident investigator had seriously miscalculated Sean’s speed.
In order to win his vehicular manslaughter case, the prosecutor also had to prove that the accident
was a “proximate cause” of Lowell’s death. But Carol’s thorough investigation revealed an autopsy
report indicating that Lowell had actually died of an infection. When he got to the ER, the doctors
there identified an internal injury and decided to operate. Carol put Lowell’s family doctor on the
stand. He testified that Lowell had had that injury for years. The doctor said that if he had known
the ER doctors were planning to operate, he would have objected. The doctor had already decided
that an operation would be too risky for Lowell, given his age and fragile condition. The state’s case
fell to pieces. The jury deliberated for twelve minutes before reaching a unanimous verdict: not guilty.
The Aftermath
Ten years have passed since the trial. Sean has moved away from his family because everywhere he
went in his hometown he felt people were whispering, “There’s the guy who killed that poor old
man.” Any time Sean comes into contact with a police officer, he starts trembling and has to fight
off a panic attack. Sean has lost faith in the justice system and abandoned his dream of a career in
law enforcement. Sean’s lawyer, Carol, went on to earn a distinguished service award for her fierce
advocacy to improve access to justice for poor people. But after repeatedly publicly criticizing the
public defender’s office in her articles and blog posts, Carol was eventually fired from her job.
© 2013 Street Law, Inc.
Handout 4: State Responses to the Issues
Cut apart to separate into four strips.
--------------------------------------------------------------------In 2012, the Washington Supreme Court approved new rules for indigent defense. The new rules
include requirements about a public defender’s experience in a particular area of law, proof of
continuing legal education, and sworn statements that attorneys are complying with caseload limits.
--------------------------------------------------------------------After Hurricane Katrina when the New Orleans public defender system was in crisis, more than 300
law students spent their winter break helping with unglamorous but essential work. The students
interviewed defendants, found police reports, and created files. After three weeks, though, the law
students went back to school.
--------------------------------------------------------------------In 2003, Georgia created a centralized, statewide public defense system. The state funded the system
by adding a filing fee of $15 to every civil case filed in the state courts. After a few years, however,
the state started diverting money from this fund in to the state’s general budget.
--------------------------------------------------------------------Several states have reclassified low-level non-violent crimes from felonies to misdemeanors. This
means that people charged with those crimes will not face jail time. Some states have developed
programs like probation, counseling, and education for first-time offenders. Defendants who take
part do not go to trial.
© 2013 Street Law, Inc.
Handout 5: Solutions—Pro and Con Analysis
Solution
© 2013 Street Law, Inc.
Pros
Cons
Teacher’s Guide
Background
The Sixth Amendment says “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to …
have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”
Since 1938 the federal government had been required to provide attorneys for indigent defendants
in felony cases. While some states guaranteed the right to counsel in criminal proceedings, not all
did. In Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), the Supreme Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment guarantee of
a right to counsel was fundamental and essential to a fair trial in state criminal justice systems as well.
The justices noted that both the government and defendants considered the aid of a lawyer in felony
criminal cases absolutely necessary. In addition, they said that the Constitution places great
emphasis on procedural safeguards designed to guarantee that defendants get fair trials. According
to the opinion, “this noble idea cannot be realized if the poor man charged with a crime has to face
his accusers without a lawyer to assist him.” While this ruling was based on the Sixth Amendment to
the U.S. constitution, the federal government has not taken a large role in state public defense
systems—either in providing funding for these systems nor in regulating how they structure their
public defense.
Later cases expanded this ruling. Notably, in Argersinger v. Hamlin (1972), the Supreme Court said
that the right to appointed counsel also applies to defendants charged with misdemeanors that carry
a possible jail sentence.
The right to an attorney means the right to “effective” assistance of counsel. This does not mean
that a defendant must have an “excellent,” or even a “good” lawyer. However, the defense mounted
by the lawyer must live up to the reasonable standards for the profession. In Strickland v. Washington,
the Supreme Court ruled that in order to have a verdict overturned based on ineffective assistance of
counsel, the defendant must show that the result would probably have been different but for the
attorney’s unprofessional conduct. The defendant must show that the attorney committed a serious
error that affected the outcome of the case. This is often difficult to prove.
The Sixth Amendment has not generally been held to guarantee the right to a government funded
attorney for poor people in civil cases.
Possible Problems identified from Sean’s Story:
Problems
Causes
Consequences
Public defenders carry a
heavy caseload
There are not enough public
defenders so each are assigned too
many cases; There is not enough
money to hire more public
They don’t have enough time to
investigate cases and prepare for trial;
They sometimes advise innocent clients
to accept bad plea bargains to dispose
© 2013 Street Law, Inc.
Prosecutors have fewer
cases than public
defenders.
Public defender offices
do not have sufficient
funding.
There is often a delay
between when an
indigent defendant is
arrested and when they
are assigned a public
defender.
Some innocent people
are convicted.
defenders; There are not laws
limiting the number of cases public
defenders may handle; The
number of prosecutions has
increased.
Prosecutor offices have more
funding and are able to hire more
staff; It is politically more
acceptable to fund prosecutors (to
“fight crime”) than to fund
defense.
State and local governments do not
provide enough money for public
defenders; It is not politically
popular to increase funding;
Governments spend a lot of
money on public safety and prison
facilities.
There are not enough public
defenders to go around so there
are delays.
Public defenders are unable to
mount an adequate defense for
clients; Public defenders lack
resources to properly investigate
and prepare for trial.
of cases quickly; Some public defenders
burn out and quit.
The prosecutors have more time to
prepare their cases; Prosecutors are able
to devote more resources to each case;
Prosecutors may be in a better position
to win at trial.
Some of the best lawyers won’t become
public defenders due to low salaries;
Public defenders often do not have
enough funds to conduct full
investigations or hire expert witnesses.
Important evidence from the scene of
the alleged crime may be lost; It is
difficult to make a strong defense case
without critical evidence; Defendants
may spend time in jail awaiting trial;
Defendants in jail may lose their jobs or
homes or custody of their children.
Innocent people are imprisoned, lose
their jobs, their homes, and custody of
their young children; Convicts’ children
and dependents suffer emotionally and
financially; Public confidence in the
justice system decreases.
As they work, students may identify things listed here as consequences rather than problems, or
causes – they can be classified in many ways. That is fine: the important thing is to branch out in
both directions. For any problem students identify, compel them to ask “so what” to identify further
consequences, and “why” to identify causes.
Sean’s case is a true story. His full name is Sean Replogle, and his car accident took place in 2001 in
Spokane, Washington. His story is told in the book Chasing Gideon, by Karen Houppert.
Possible Solutions to Address Problems in Indigent Defense
Solution
Institute mandatory pro
bono requirements –
© 2013 Street Law, Inc.
Pros
There are many attorneys and law
students who could do some pro
Cons
Unwilling, disinterested, and/or
inexperienced practitioners could make
lawyers or law students
would be required to
participate in indigent
criminal defense cases
Pay a flat fee or reduced
hourly wage to private
practitioners (attorneys)
to take on indigent
criminal defense cases as
needed
Provide funding for
public defenders
through charging court
filing fees.
Increase public
defenders’ salaries and
improve their benefits
Provide training for all
law students in indigent
defense
bono (volunteer) work, decreasing
the burden of overloaded public
defenders.
very poor (ineffective) lawyers.
Reduces public defenders’ caseload;
decreases financial burden on
state/locality if the representation is
done for a reduced fee.
Private attorneys may neglect indigent
clients in favor of paying clients when
faced with competing time constraints
or resource limitations. Flat fee creates
a disincentive for lawyers to do quality
work.
May unfairly burden people who are
filing cases; Funding stream is
unpredictable.
Increase and improve
crime prevention and
diversion programs
Could decrease crime rates and
recidivism rates, thereby lowering
public defenders’ caseload burden.
Reform criminal laws
and prosecution
practices so that some
felonies are just
misdemeanors.
Could decrease number of crimes
charged, thereby decreasing public
defenders’ caseloads.
Raise taxes to fund
indigent defense
Could help fund more public
defenders and other legal resources;
could lighten individual defenders’
caseloads.
Could attract more and better
attorneys to the field, and improve
retention rates.
More new attorneys will be equipped
to effectively represent indigent
criminal defendants.
Could help fund the number of
public defenders and other legal
resources available to indigent
litigants; could lighten defenders’
caseloads.
Have the federal
Could result in cost-savings with
government provide
streamlined and uniform systems;
funding to the states and could guarantee a minimum standard
set standards for
in all jurisdictions; would help poorer
uniform delivery of
jurisdictions close funding gaps.
public defense.
© 2013 Street Law, Inc.
Somebody has to pay for the increased
wages and benefits.
Just because they’re trained, doesn’t
mean they’ll be willing to represent
indigent defendants; law schools may
be reluctant to include required
instruction.
Somebody has to pay for the
programs; Public may not like
programs that do not put admitted
criminals in jail.
Could prove adverse to the public
good, as some bad acts would no
longer be crimes and therefor would
go unpunished or less severely
punished, and there’d be no
deterrence.
Public may not be willing to pay
increased taxes; politically difficult to
raise taxes; increased revenue may go
to other problems first.
Could infringe on states’ sovereignty;
public might not support spending
federal dollars on state public defense;
would require additional federal taxes
or revenue sources.