Skip to main content

Notable Recent Publications, February 2025

 

Notable Recent Publications features the latest empirical research and data related to indigent/public defense. If you have suggestions, ideas for work that should be included, or trouble accessing any of the articles featured, please write to Venita Embry at vembry@rti.org.  

 

Articles

Lindsay Bing, Carmen Gutierrez, Who gets a second chance? Compliance, classification, and criminal conviction, Social Forces, 2025https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soaf021

Felony conviction carries lifelong consequences that impact civic, economic, and social rights and opportunities, yet not everyone who is found guilty of a felony will bear the mark of conviction. Deferred adjudication is an increasingly popular intervention that offers legally guilty defendants protection from the mark of conviction conditional on the completion of community supervision. By conditioning conviction on discretionary assessments of compliance, rather than legal establishment of guilt, deferral and similar interventions may exacerbate inequality and further concentrate the mark of conviction among marginalized groups. However, relatively few studies examine disparities in the decision to defer conviction and dismiss charges. In this study, we draw on twenty years of court records to ask “for whom is the mark of conviction and formal punishment dependent on compliance rather than the legal establishment of guilt, and who passes the test of compliance?” Findings reveal that, even when accounting for features of the offense, both race and socioeconomic status condition who gets a “second chance” at a clean record. These findings have implications for how we study inequality in criminal courts and understand the production and meaning of conviction.

Naufal, G., Patterson, B., Danser, R., & Greiner, D. J. (2025). The Causal Impact of Counsel at First Appearance: Evidence from Two Randomized Control Trials (No. 17712). Institute of Labor Economics (IZA). https://docs.iza.org/dp17712.pdf

This paper examines the impact of defense counsel at first appearance (CAFA) on criminal justice outcomes using randomized control trials in two Texas counties. The study evaluates the influence of CAFA on bond amounts, pretrial release, conditions, and post-magistration outcomes such as recidivism and failure to appear. Results show that while CAFA reduces bond amounts and influences bond types in one jurisdiction, its effects on pretrial release and recidivism are limited. These findings highlight jurisdictional differences and suggest that CAFA’s impact may be more modest than previous studies indicate, underscoring the need for further research in this area.

 

Reports and Briefs

Brink, M. N., Metzger, P. R., Solving the Public Defense Crisis in Kansas, Deason Criminal Justice Reform Center (February 2025). Policy Brief. https://doi.org/10.25172/dc.13

Kansas has a constitutional obligation to provide counsel to any arrested person who cannot afford to hire a private attorney. But attorney shortages in Kansas threaten this core constitutional right. According to the American Bar Association, there are an average of four attorneys per 1,000 people nationwide. However, only six of Kansas’s 105 counties have two or more attorneys per 1,000 people. In 44 counties, there is just one attorney or fewer per 1,000 residents. The situation is particularly worrisome in rural Kansas. In 2023, nearly half of Kansas’s population lived in rural counties, but 80% of its lawyers lived in its six largest counties. Two rural counties— Wichita County and Hodgeman County—had no attorneys at all.

Kang, C., Mendoza, A., & Clair, M. (2025). Systems Navigators in Public Defense: Recommendations for Assisting Clients Pretrial. Report. https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/rhw5j_v1

People charged with crime often struggle to navigate the court process and secure the resources needed to rebuild their lives, especially if they are mandated to abide by pretrial conditions. In the summer of 2024, researchers at Stanford University collaborated with the Santa Clara County Public Defender’s Office to pilot an innovative “systems navigator” program that sought to support felony clients navigating the pretrial process. This report describes the systems navigator program and offers lessons learned. We detail five practical recommendations that could improve collaboration between lawyers and their clients and facilitate access to social services.

Shea, D., Selbin, J., Perwez, A., Proff, H. S., Duncan, N., Savage, A., & Bugga, P. (2025). Unrepresented and Unseen. Report. https://youthlaw.org/sites/default/files/attachments/2025-01/Lakewood%20Report%201.13.25.pdf

The absence of robust data and information about municipal court processes underscores the need for greater understanding of how these courts affect youth and their families. This report aims to illuminate the municipal court system and practices through the lens of the Lakewood Municipal Court, analyzing the most frequently charged offenses against youth and the consequences they face. It details the court process that youth and their families encounter after receiving a ticket and identifies the barriers youth and their families face as they navigate the municipal court system. While focused on Lakewood, the report also examines practices and reforms from other municipalities across Colorado.

Analysis of the data and court observations revealed numerous problems: • The court can impose fines and fees up to $2,650 per violation, which youth are unable to pay; • The court has handled over 8,000 cases involving youth from 2016 to 2022 for incidents occurring in community and school settings; • Youth are not provided with legal counsel, making it difficult for youth to understand their rights and adequately defend themselves against city attorneys; • Youth receive tickets at schools for minor misconduct, contributing to a troubling pipeline from schools to municipal courts.

To address these issues, this report calls on municipal courts, policymakers, police departments, school districts, and advocates to take action. It emphasizes the necessity for reforms that prioritize the needs of youth and their families to reduce the number of young people entangled in Colorado’s municipal court system and to protect their rights.