Daily Archives: May 15, 2005

So what’s the deal with

the size of eggs. It seems that a plate of 2 (or 3) scrambled eggs never looks the same. Every restaurant that you go to serves 2 eggs in different sizes. At some places two eggs make a large plate; at others, woefully inadequate.

They’re two eggs, they should be the same amount regardless of where you go.

The age of indigence

Yes, I said I have nothing intelligent to contribute tonight, but I wanted to point this out. It looks like Mr. D.A. has awoken! In his usual descriptive, analytical style, he takes my post about the state of indigent defense systems and spins it into a larger discussion. He asks

So, in law speak, indigent defense is the defense of very/extremely
poor/needy people. Seems clear enough at first blush. But. . .

  • What is ‘indigent?’ That is, how poor is very/extremely poor?
  • Once we know that, how do we determine if a given defendant is, in fact, indigent?
  • And who decides if a particular defendant is indigent?
  • Who represents the indigent defendant? Obviously, an attorney, but which attorney?
  • How
    does that attorney get compensated? Or do we impose the duty to
    represent indigent defendants on the members of the bar as a mandatory
    pro bono publico activity. Sort of an "in kind" element of their bar
    dues. Abraham Lincoln said an attorney’s time and advice are his stock
    in trade. Is it fair to take that time and advice without compensation?
    Is there a Fifth Amendment problem here?
  • If we are going to pay attorneys to defend the indigent, how much are we going to pay them?
  • And who, exactly, is ‘we’ in this context?

As a primer to this whole discussion, Mr. DA correctly points to Gideon v. Wainwright, which should be starting point for this conversation. I know some of Mr. DA’s question were rhetorical, but I’ll respond anyway.

Currently, the standard for indigence (atleast here in CT) is $250 per week for a single individual. (That’s $12,000 a year – if you make more than that – you don’t qualify.) The cutoff is usually loosely based on the Federal Poverty Level, which places the income for a single person family at $9,570. I guess one can make the argument that $12,000 is a completely unrealistic number. As explored in my post linked above, there is a large middle class that lives paycheck to paycheck. This middle class makes far more than $10-12,000, yet would be completely unable to retain private counsel. Perhaps the determination should be of take home income retained after making debt payments (credit cards, loans, car payments, etc..) This might provide a more realistic guideline for determining true indigency.

Who decides indigency? I would leave it up to the individual state system to analyze cost of living in that particular state and measure average incomes and then settling on a level that is reasonable. Whether a particular individual is indigent is, ofcourse, determined by investigation undertaken by the PD’s office.

The rest of Mr. DA’s questions are, I think, philosophical questions, so I’ll leave them alone. I will say this, however: As part of our profession, I think it is the responsibility of each attorney to provide representation to people who have no money. The defense of an individual’s liberty is, in my opinion, the greatest service that we can provide to the community at large. Prosecutors get paid by the state/federal government to prosecute those who pose a risk to society. It is only natural, if we are to maintain this system of checks and balances against the government’s power, that the same government provides representation to those who cannot afford it – if for nothing else, then to avoid the appearance of impropriety. There are a large number of attorneys out there, such as myself, who love being public defenders – and in fact, would prefer it to being private attorneys.

Just think about this: criminal defendants are not "those" people. Tomorrow, it could be you. You could, finally, get pulled over for driving home intoxicated on a friday night. You could get arrested for that pot you smoke. You could even get arrested for that nailpolish you shoplifted. Wouldn’t you want an attorney then?

 

Two days, three cities and PD rants

This is my first post after the Friday night execution of Michael Ross. Some of you may be wondering where I was. Perhaps silent mourning? A show of defiance?

I wish my blog were that influential.

I was away at my cousin’s law school graduation. Spent most of the weekend flying, driving 3 and a half hours each way and well, celebrating.

Right now, I’m too tired to type anything intelligent, so I’ll just point out Skelly’s comments to the PD rant in this post.