According to the laywers.com (n.d.), a court is supposed to appoint a lawyer for a person who is unable to meet the expense of a lawyer. In this case, the appointed lawyer is called a public defender. Therefore, a public defender refers to a lawyer selected to represent individuals who are not able to afford legal representation. In some cases, a public defender appears for clients who have been granted legal aid. However, not so many people place their trust on public defenders. The idea behind this pessimism is that public defenders are mostly overworked and have little time for their clients.
For that reason, although they possess the same skills as private attorneys, public defenders are thought to be less effective (Hoffman, Rubin and Shepherd, n.d.). Nonetheless, public defenders attract cases that are difficult to win. The justification to this trend is that they compete against the state in these cases (Wice, 2005). Consequently, their failure is not brought about by incompetence, but because they do not enjoy the same privileges as prosecutors. Interestingly, public defendants appear to be more successful in areas where they have worked for a long period of time (laywers.com, n.d.). This essay provides an insight into the work of a public defender.
The poor, just like the rich, have the right to be represented by an attorney. Moreover, the United States constitution states clearly that everybody is entitled to legal representation (lawyers.com, n.d.). It is, therefore, vital that the American justice system guarantees an equal playing ground to the prosecutor and the defendant. As a result, the defendant is assured legal representation and fairness in his case. Moreover, instances of unnecessary loss of freedom through wrongful conviction are minimized (Wice, 2005). Wise (2005) also adds that the defendant may also avoid death or unnecessary fines. Most importantly, the right to a counsel must be ensured in a criminal case (Wice, 2005).
In a criminal case, unlike a civil case, a defendant battles against the state. Therefore, the plaintiff is represented by a prosecutor who is publicly –financed. Moreover, the prosecutor is assisted by a group of investigators, police and a trained office staff (Wice, 2005). Therefore, without legal representation, the defendant will most likely face an unfair trial. For instance, he may not be able to voice his opinion on the selection of a jury. Many lawyers believe that the procedure for selecting a jury greatly determines the outcome of a case (Wise, 2005).
According to Hoffman, Rubin and Shepherd (n.d.), the right to counsel is provided for in the sixth amendment. This amendment was made by the Supreme Court in 1963 (Hoffman, Rubin and Shepherd, n.d.). Moreover, if the representation involves a public defender, expenses incurred should be catered for by the state. Furthermore, the right to counsel is also a key element in the bill of rights (Wise, 2005). Accordingly, a judge must ensure that the rights of a defendant are protected. However, a large number of defendants are charged in some states without legal representation despite these amendments. Nonetheless, the states in question are yet to adopt these provisions.
Lack of legal representation affects a person’s ability to exercise other rights (Wise, 2005). However, to enjoy the services of a public defender, one has to prove to the judge that a lawyer is too expensive for him (lawyers.com, n.d.). In this regard, one has to account for his income and assets (lawyers.com, n.d.). It is worth noting that if a person provides wrong information to the court, he may be prosecuted. However, in the United States, these conditions vary from court to court. Therefore, a person may be granted a public defender in a particular court, but not the other. In areas where public defenders are not available, a court may appoint a private attorney (lawyers.com, n.d.). This happens at the expense of the public. However, in some courts a person may be granted a public defender, but has to reimburse some of the costs incurred (lawyers.com, n.d.). Lawyers.com (n.d.) reaffirms that this treatment is referred to as partial indigency.
Hoffman, Rubin and Shepherd (n.d.) state that most of the early studies showed that public defendants were as effective as private attorneys. However, studies done after the 1960s have suggested otherwise (Hoffman, Rubin and Shepherd, n.d.) Therefore, legal representation by a public defendant has its own advantages and disadvantages. To start with, public defendants have too many cases to handle at any given time. Therefore, it is unlikely that they will devote enough time to one’s case. In addition, public defenders cannot afford to hire investigators and also lack other vital resources (lawyers.com, n.d.). In their study, Hoffman, Rubin and Shepherd (n.d.) claim that public defenders attain poorer outcomes than private attorneys. Hoffman, Rubin and Shepherd (n.d.) reached this conclusion after analyzing the duration of sentences a group of defendants received after conviction. Furthermore, public defenders are young attorneys in most instances. For that reason, they lack the necessary experience to handle complicated cases. Moreover, a public defender cannot represent a person in a suit related to administrative matters or civil law (lawyers.com, n.d.).
Public defenders interact with the same prosecutors on daily basis. For that reason, they might be in a position to understand these judges and prosecutors better than other lawyers. Therefore, public defenders understand the characters and level of tolerance of these judges and prosecutors. This gives them an edge over the prosecutors in most suits. In addition, public defenders specialize in certain. Consequently, they are up-to-date with new developments in their areas of specialty. In some instances, cases involving public defendants take a shorter period than those involving private lawyers. Public defenders, hence, have the capability to efficiently size up a case and prepare a plea bargain pact that is acceptable to the judge and the prosecutor on time (lawyers.com, n.d.).
There are many innocent defendants who would like to hire a private counsel. However, their financial situation cannot allow them to do so. Consequently, they have to revert to public defendants. Public defendants are, hence, very useful to the poor. Nonetheless, there is evident that public defendants present weaker cases than private attorneys (Hoffman, Rubin and Shepherd, n.d.). This situation is brought about by the fact that public defendants have more case to handle than private attorneys (lawyers.com, n.d.). As a result, they may not be able to spend enough time on a given case. For that reason, an overburdened public defender has little time and fewer resources to assess a suit precisely. However, since they interact with judges and prosecutors on a daily basis, public defendants may have an upper hand in some cases.
References
Hoffman, M.B., Rubin, P.H. & Shepherd, J. M. (n.d.). An empirical study of public defender effectiveness: self-selection by the “marginally indigent. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 3 (223). Web.
Lawyers.com. (n.d.). Public defenders. Web.
Wice, P.B. (2005). Public defenders and the American justice system. Connecticut, WP: Greenwood Publishing Group.