Indigent Defense System

Gideon Alert: NJ Gov’s dismissal of state public defender sparks debate over independence

BY Jon Mosher on Friday, March 4, 2011 at 1:00 PM

On March 3, the Newark Star-Ledger published an editorial on the New Jersey governor’s recent decision to remove the current chief public defender, Yvonne Smith Segars, and nominate a new candidate for the state senate’s approval.  New Jersey has a statewide, state-funded indigent defense system that provides direct services primarily through regional staffed public defender offices.  The state’s chief public defender, who oversees all right to counsel services in the state, is appointed by the governor with approval of the senate.

These appellate standards are divided into two parts. Part I sets out specific criteria for assuring the quality of legal representation in appellate matters. These include the structural requirements necessary to ensure quality, as well as attorney performance objects that define quality representation on behalf of the client. Part II sets out specific criteria for assuring the efficiency of legal representation in appellate matters. These include effective management procedures and office policies, as well as attorney procedures for the preparation of appellate briefs and other client-centered operations.

Author/Organization: National Legal Aid & Defender Association (NLADA)
Publication Date: 1980

Items contained in the NLADA Library do not and are not meant to constitute advice of any kind. Content in the NLADA Library is contributed by users. If you believe this material infringes your or any other person’s copyright or if you feel that the material is inappropriate, please report this to NLADA Staff by clicking below.

FLAG THIS CONTENT

The ABA’s Providing Defense Services (1992), Standard 5-1.5 calls for access to ongoing training for public defense attorneys.  The preface to the NLADA defender training standards also states: “Continuous improvement and training are critical to competence.” And as NLADA’s Performance Guidelines for Criminal Defense Representation (1995) define specific criteria for attorney competence, these Defender Training and Development Standards establish guidelines for the creation and implementation of ongoing training programs for defender systems against those performance criteria.

Author/Organization: National Legal Aid & Defender Association (NLADA)
Publication Date: 1997

Items contained in the NLADA Library do not and are not meant to constitute advice of any kind. Content in the NLADA Library is contributed by users. If you believe this material infringes your or any other person’s copyright or if you feel that the material is inappropriate, please report this to NLADA Staff by clicking below.

FLAG THIS CONTENT

These Standards tailor previously existing national standards – those for public defender or contract defender systems – to specifically address those systems employing an assigned counsel delivery model.  The standards apply equally to the administration of an assigned counsel, whether it is the only right to counsel system in place in the specific jurisdiction or if it serves as a secondary/conflict system.

Author/Organization: National Legal Aid & Defender Association (NLADA)
Publication Date: 1989

Items contained in the NLADA Library do not and are not meant to constitute advice of any kind. Content in the NLADA Library is contributed by users. If you believe this material infringes your or any other person’s copyright or if you feel that the material is inappropriate, please report this to NLADA Staff by clicking below.

FLAG THIS CONTENT

These Guidelines are intended to help local and state govern¬ments and agencies which choose to establish contract defense programs and which choose to award contracts on a competitive basis to do so constitutionally, and to help insure that efficient contract programs operate well for the government, the courts and the citizens they serve.Contracts written, negotiated and entered into in accordance with these Guidelines and with consideration of the issues these Guidelines raise should, by their terms, help ensure that high quality service will be provided to those defendants unable to afford counsel. Such contracts should also provide to the criminal justice system effective defense services which comport with government's other interests in efficiency, economy and accountability.

Author/Organization: National Legal Aid & Defender Association (NLADA)
Publication Date: 1984

Items contained in the NLADA Library do not and are not meant to constitute advice of any kind. Content in the NLADA Library is contributed by users. If you believe this material infringes your or any other person’s copyright or if you feel that the material is inappropriate, please report this to NLADA Staff by clicking below.

FLAG THIS CONTENT

As state governments began establishing statewide defender systems in the 1960s, reclaiming the 6th Amendment right to counsel obligations they had previously delegated to county governments, the Model Defender Act sets out the structural standards for the traditional public defender delivery model. While the standards assume a statewide defender system is in place, setting forth the duties and responsibilities of a state “defender general” position, the specific criteria equally to county and regional public defender agencies.

Author/Organization: National Legal Aid & Defender Association (NLADA)
Publication Date: 1970

Items contained in the NLADA Library do not and are not meant to constitute advice of any kind. Content in the NLADA Library is contributed by users. If you believe this material infringes your or any other person’s copyright or if you feel that the material is inappropriate, please report this to NLADA Staff by clicking below.

FLAG THIS CONTENT

TX Chief Justice speaks out on indigent defense and juvenile justice issues

BY David Carroll on Friday, February 25, 2011 at 3:48 PM

On February 23, 2011, Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Wallace B. Jefferson gave his state of the judiciary before the 82nd state legislature.  Texas has two high courts – the Supreme Court for civil and juvenile matters, and the Court of Criminal Appeals for criminal matters.  Though Justice Jefferson heads the civil high court, he nonetheless felt compelled to speak about indigent defense needs in the state.  Bemoaning the fact that Texas ranks “among the lowest of the 50 states” in right to counsel per capita expenditures, he urged the legislature not to go forward with projected cuts to the indigent defense budget.  The right to counsel is primarily a county responsibility in Texas, with the state making limited contributions through the Texas Task Force on Indigent Defense, which provides state funding, requires local planning for indigent defense and reporting of expenditures, and provides an array of resources for counties to improve these services.  A cut to their budget “would drain the system of resources we need to assure indigent criminal defendants get competent lawyers who make the system fair.”

Commonly referred to as Byrne/JAG grants, the official name is the "Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program."  The program is administered by the Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), and is described by BJA as "the leading source of federal justice funding to state and local jurisdictions."

Author/Organization: Phyllis E. Mann
Publication Date: 02/25/2011

During 2010, the National Criminal Justice Association (NCJA), in partnership with BJA, surveyed the State Administering Agencies (SAAs) that oversee Byrne JAG program funds, to find out how they used those funds.  The survey compiled data on how funds were spent in 2009 (which could include money from 2007, 2008, and 2009 JAG awards, as well as special Recovery Act awards made in 2009).

NCJA prepared this document to show examples of how Byrne JAG funds were used for indigent defense. 

Author/Organization: National Criminal Justice Association (NCJA)
Publication Date: 2010

Items contained in the NLADA Library do not and are not meant to constitute advice of any kind. Content in the NLADA Library is contributed by users. If you believe this material infringes your or any other person’s copyright or if you feel that the material is inappropriate, please report this to NLADA Staff by clicking below.

FLAG THIS CONTENT

During 2010, the National Criminal Justice Association (NCJA), in partnership with BJA, surveyed the State Administering Agencies (SAAs) that oversee Byrne JAG program funds, to find out how they used those funds.  The survey compiled data on how funds were spent in 2009 (which could include money from 2007, 2008, and 2009 JAG awards, as well as special Recovery Act awards made in 2009).  

This document shows how funds were distributed by SAAs, during 2009, across 43 areas of criminal justice.  The results show that, of a total of $1,203,538,214 spent in 2009, only $3,208,686 was spent on public defense -- or roughly 1/4 of 1 percent (0.0027). 

Author/Organization: National Criminal Justice Association (NCJA)
Publication Date: 2010

Items contained in the NLADA Library do not and are not meant to constitute advice of any kind. Content in the NLADA Library is contributed by users. If you believe this material infringes your or any other person’s copyright or if you feel that the material is inappropriate, please report this to NLADA Staff by clicking below.

FLAG THIS CONTENT