Notable Recent Publications features the latest empirical research and data related to indigent defense. Should you have suggestions, ideas for work that should be included, or trouble accessing any of the articles featured, please write to albdavies@smu.edu.
Articles
Milan Das – Impediments to Independence: How the Workplace Culture of Public Defender Offices Negatively Affects the Representation of Indigent Defendants. Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics, vol 32, pp.469-481.
[From the article:] “Part I of this Note will discuss the
problematic elements of the organization of indigent defense systems across the
country. It will focus on how public defender offices are assigned cases; how
the office is subjected to administrative oversight; and the means by which
public defenders are remunerated (or not). In Part II, this Note will attempt
to use organizational sociology to argue that many of the structural elements
of indigent defense systems discussed in Part I-especially those related to the
leadership of defender offices-create and perpetuate an office culture hostile
to the independence of attorneys in their representation of indigent clients,
one that saddles attorneys with unmanageable caseloads and violates the rules
of professional conduct. This Note will conclude that, until structural reforms
are enacted to ensure that their leadership is free from corrupting influence
and their independence is protected, public defender offices will continue to
force attorneys to neglect their ethical obligations. Such structural reforms
include establishing independent oversight boards, enacting standardized
procedures for attorney appointment and compensation, and insulating the
institutional leadership of public defender officers from undue political
influence.”
Theodore Wilson – The Promise of BehavioralEconomics for Understanding Decision-Making in the Court. Criminology & Public Policy, online first.
Decision‐making scholars often limit their purview to the
decision to offend, whereas sentencing scholars focus on court case processing
within administrative data sets. What is missing between these two camps is an
incorporation of the sanctioning process into offender decision‐making and an
integration of relevant findings from offender decision‐making and behavioral
economics into courtroom actor decision‐making. In this article, I highlight
several specific concepts from behavioral economics that can be applied to the
court and interpret existing sentencing research in light of these same
behavioral economic concepts. I also discuss how sentencing scholarship can be
integrated into offender decision‐making research, further bridging the two
domains. I conclude with discussions of policy adaptations based on current and
future research expanding into these proposed areas.
NLADA Innovative Solutions Website and Reports
National Legal Aid and Defender Association – InnovativeSolutions in Public Defense Initiative
This site refers to ten reports:
- One assesses the impact of attorney mentoring programs in two jurisdictions;
- One discusses research partnerships in defense
- Six are ‘fact sheets’ on policy innovations in NY, KY, CA (twice), TX, and WI;
- One summarizes the results from all six sites;
- One, on Federal funding, is forthcoming.
Susan Saab Fortney – Assigned Counsel MentoringPrograms: Results and Lessons from Two Pilot Projects
[From the introduction:] “Although growing in number,
mentoring programs with coordinated oversight and program administration are
still rare.4 Therefore, the principal purpose of this project was to implement
and evaluate two pilot mentoring programs, to share lessons learned, and to
offer recommendations for others interested in establishing effective mentoring
opportunities. This report describes and evaluates pilot projects for assigned
counsel mentoring in Lubbock County, Texas and in Westchester County, New
York. Any new mentoring program should
be evaluated to obtain information on the program’s effectiveness and impact.
Insights from a program’s evaluation can help improve existing programs and
inform the implementation of new mentoring programs in other
jurisdictions. The balance of this
report contains three chapters that provide: 1) descriptions of the pilot
programs implemented, 2) findings from their evaluations, and 3) lessons
learned and recommendations for others seeking to implement assigned counsel
mentoring programs.”
Jack Cutrone – Researcher-Practitioner Partnerships:Applying a Collaborative Model to Improve Indigent Defense Systems
[From the introduction:] “This paper shares observations and
advice about the use of practitioner-researcher partnerships as a mechanism for
improving indigent defense systems. Chapter 1 discusses the gradual shift
toward use of evidence-based interventions to assess indigent defense services.
Chapter 2 profiles the goals and contours of the six Innovative Solutions
Initiative projects. Finally, Chapter 3 offers lessons learned from the six
projects and condenses information gathered from the sites into a road map to
help those who seek to begin a researcher-practitioner partnership in indigent
defense action research.”
Innovative Solutions in Public Defense Fact Sheet Series
- Summary document: http://www.nlada.org/sites/default/files/pictures/2019-08-21%20nlada-main-082119.pdf
- Alameda County, CA: http://www.nlada.org/sites/default/files/pictures/2019-09-17%20nlada-alameda.pdf
- Contra Costa County, CA: http://www.nlada.org/sites/default/files/nlada-contracosta.pdf
- Kentucky: http://www.nlada.org/sites/default/files/nlada-kentucky.pdf
- New York City: http://www.nlada.org/sites/default/files/nlada-newyorkcity.pdf
- Texas: http://www.nlada.org/sites/default/files/nlada-texas.pdf
- Wisconsin: http://www.nlada.org/sites/default/files/nlada-wisconsin.pdf
Resources
National Legal Aid and Defender Association – SystemsDevelopment Committee Rapid Response Research Team
[From the website:] “The Systems Development and Reform
(SDR) Committee offers a free resource aimed at helping chief public defenders
from small to mid-sized offices who lack in-house research and I.T. capacity.
The SDR Committee’s Rapid Response
Research Team is a core group of experienced researchers and
technologists recruited from various organizations, including the Indigent Defense Research
Association, who can provide consultation and offer suggestions about research
and data projects that public defenders hope to undertake. Examples of areas of
expertise among rapid response team members include defender program case
management systems, data collection, data visualization, research, and
evaluation. The assistance is a perfect jumping off point, for example, when
deciding how to move forward with a research project idea, or to get expert
views on case management system upgrades.
“To access the Rapid
Response Research Team please complete this form briefly
describing the issue for which you would like consultation. NLADA staff
will forward the request to the Rapid Response Research Team participants and
see who has capacity and expertise to respond. Someone will get back to you as
soon as possible.”