News Scrapbook 1986

-

Los Angeles, CA (Los Angeles Co) Times (San Diego Ed .) (Cir . D 50,010) (Cir. S 55,573) JAN 3 1986

Jlllni ·•

P. C. 8

Eu. I 888

Sunday, January 5, 1986 Defe'nder: Changes seen in county legal aid for poor Continued from B-ln~l---~~~iiii==i riding factor, quality became sec- "It's adequate," he said of indigent cide to change the system after the serious felony cases filed between tr"' ond." defense here. "I grant you, you'll find blue ribbon commission makes its Dec. 1, 1984, and March 31, 1985, and The contract system, in fact, was some (attorneys) that aren't right, report. concluded that the public defenders

San Diego, Calif. Union (C1rc. D 217,324) (Circ;. S. 339, 788)

Critics say the nature of the bid- ding gives attorneys a financial in- centive to short-change their clients. "Perhaps the greatest evil in that system is that it's an incentive to dispose of cases at the earbest possi- ble moment," said Judge Victor Bi- anchini of the El Cajon Municipal Court. "Because there's a profit mo- tive built into the contracts, obvious- ly the less time you spend on a case, the more money you make." · Many of the contracts in effect now pay the attorney groups a fixed rate for a certain number of cases, regardless of whether they are set- tled with a guilty plea at the earliest possible moment or are taken through a full jury trial. Some of those contracts do not provide for additional payment for hiring de- fense investigators. "It's a real hodgepodge," said Ger- ald Blank, a San Diego criminal de- fense lawyer and chairman of the state Bar committee on criminal de- fense. "There's no uniformity. ''You've gc,t ii bit of Russian roulette going on. People who are in jail don't know if they're going to get somebody who has got a fair con- tract or somebody who is under pres- sure to plead them out." According to the state Bar report, "The quality of legal services provid- ed to the indigent accused in San Diego has deteriorated and plum- meted since the institution of the contract-bid system." It added that attorneys in such a system work under "an intolerable burden" and "must do a balancing a•·t, pitting the interests of their clients against the interests of profitability and the sur- vival of their businesses.'' In 1985, the American Bar Associa- tion's House of Delegates adopted a report criticizing the San Diego County system and passed a resolu- tion opposing the award of contracts through competitive bidding without considering quality. In response to the growing chal- lenges, including a lawsuit calling the system unconstitutional, the Board of Supervisors agreed last year to pay $23,670 for a blue-ribbon commission to identify the problems with indigent defense in the county and to recommend alternatives. The 15-member commission was established by the San Diego Law Center at the UOW!I:Sit.ilf ~ego and its chairman is Sheldon Krantz, dean of the law school. It is comprised primarily of judges and lawyers.

19 G

~ANS

cost less per case and were slightly

Estimates vary on whether a pub- lie defender system would cost more more effective.

but many of them are killing them- selves to give their client every Nitz and his deputy, Phil Harry, said they have suspended or removed lawyers who were not performing properly, but they said they have never received a specific complaint of incompetence by a lawyer. Others disagreed with that conten- "Yes, I've complained, through my presiding judge," said Judge Bianchi- ni. "And the presiding judge com- plained on a number of occasions." One of the major criticisms of the contract system is that it is virtually "It is my impression that these guys simply did not administer the program in the field, by reacting to complaints, by putting observers in the field," Bianchini said. "The con- tract system, of all systems, needs supervision. It's my impression that they have no training program, no supervision, no observation program, "We can't follow every attorney in the county around," Harry said. "We'd like to do more." Nitz said he has to rely on the as- sumption that the attorneys who are awarded contracts are ethical. "It all comes down to the integrity of the individual," he said. break." tion. unsupervised. nothing.''

adopted as the result of a consul- tant's report in 1977 saying it would be cheaper than using rotating court- But the cost of the contract system has risen steadily since then. The projected $11.3 million cost for this fiscal year is more than double the $5.5 million budgeted to defend the poor in the 1979-80 fiscal year. Many observers cite former Super- visor Roger Hedgecock as the lead- ing proponent of keeping the cost of indigent defense as low as possible. In 1980, Hedgecock charged that the county was providing "a Cadillac de- fense" for every poor defendant. Critics of the contract system also say that there are few political rewards for supporting a sound de- fense mechanism for the poor. Said Blank: "People like Roger Hedgecock could make political hay out of saying, 'We'rP saving money by going with th<> !vw-r;"" 0 r.'" Rep. Jim Bates, D-San Diego, a member of the Board of Supervisors from 1974 to 1982, remembers the ar- gument over what type of system to "I think the objection was philo- sophical," he said. "There was this trend to contract everything out. They didn't like the idea of creating a new bureaucracy. I think there was this feeling that government couldn't proved it couldn't do it well. I think it's a disgrace, the kind of defense these people are getting." Condemnation of the contract sys- tem is not universal. Several judges and lawyers said they favor such a system if it is administered well and does not provide an incentive for lawyers to dispose of cases quickly. Vista Municipal Court Judge Runs- ton G. Maino sent a letter to the blue ribbon commission, praising the per- formance of Chirra, Margolis & Hub- bard, a firm that receives $400,000 a year to handle up to 1,100 poor de- fendants charged with so-called "non-serious felonies." "Whatever problems there might be with contract groups in the coun- ty, these criticisms to not apply to them," Maino wrote. He also said, however, that one at- torney in the firm did not show up on time for court appearances and that if he were on trial in a complicated felony jury trial, he would be com- fortable being represented by only two of the firm's attorneys. Mel Nitz, director of the Office of Defender Services, administers the existing system. He defends its per- formance, even though he has recom- mended to the Board of Supervisors that a full public defender's office be implemented. appointed lawyers. choose a bit differently.

"I think this board, with all sinceri- ty, wants to do away with the prob- !em that is indigent defense," said Nitz. "They are as tired as anyone else of all the bickering." Nitz, who established the Fresno County Public Defender's Office and ran it for 14 years before coming here in 1980, said he couldn't predict what the board will do, but made his support of a public defender's office clear. "It has stability," he said. "That is something this county dras-

or less than the contract system. Nitz predicted that a full public defend- er's office could be operated for about $1 million Jess per year than contracting. Others suggested it would cost somewhat more, but be worth it in terms of supervision, or- ganization and quality of representa- Analysts in the county administra- tor's office recently released a study comparing the county's limited pub- lie defender program with the use of contracted lawyers. It tracked 524 tion.

Jlll~,. ·•

P C. 8 I U8 Changes in Iefal aid for poor seen Some predict new system will come from criticisms By Pat Flynn Starr Wrlt r The system that provides lawyer.; for poor people charged with crimes in the county has reached dn evolu- tionary crossroads. "I think we can ay there are going to be some dramatic changes," said Diane Campbell, chairwoman of the committee that advises the county Board of Supervisors on indigent de- fense. "The Board of Supervisors def- initely is not satisfied with the way we've progressed." Unlike 43 of the 50 largest counties m the United Stat San Diego Coun- ty does not have a full-fledged public defender office to provide represen- tation to poor defendants. Instead, 1t operates a limited public defender office with 21 attorneys who handle 70 percent of the most serious felony cases. The rest of the indigent cases are distributed among 380 private attor- neys who have individual contracts and 28 attorney groups that are awarded contracts on the basis of low bids. An average of 33,000 poor people a year are given legal representation at a cost to the public that is predict- ed to reach $11.3 million this fiscal year. ANovember 1984 report by a com- mittee of the state Bar Association called it the largest and most com- plex contract system in the nation. And the system of awarding these legal contracts to the lowest bidder has been condemned by everyone from local participants in the crimi- nal justice system to the American Bar Association since 1t was institut- ed in 1983. See DEFENDER !n Page B-6 I "

tically needs."

The San Diego Union/Cindy Lubke-Romero

Mel Nitz early February,

Glenn Warren, executive director of the commission, said it is consid- ering four possibilities: • Areturn to the system that exist- ed before contracting was adopted in 1978. Under that arrangement, judg- es rotated appointments among a panel of lawyers and supervised pay- ments to the lawyers based on a fee schedule. • A continuation of the existing system, with some modifications. • A non-profit corporation, funded by the county but with a private board of directors, that would essen- tially be a comprehensive public de- fender office. • A full-flwged public defender office, operatmg as a regular county department and providing all indi- gent defense except in conflict-of-in- terest cases. For years, many members of the criminal defense bar in San Diego County have argued in favor of a public defender office, asserting that the Board of Supervisors has avoided adopting the system used by most other large counties out of concern for its cost. "The contract system is definitely cheaper," said Elisabeth Semel, a past president of the Criminal De- fense Bar Association and the Crimi- nal Defenst Lawyers Club. "It's cheaper than a public defender and it's a slap in the face to the constitu- tion. "It's very simple. The concern of the Board of Supervisors has always been money. The contract system was accepted because it was viewed as the cheapest way.'' Judge Larrie Brainard, presiding judge of tlle El Cajon Muncipal Court, said, "Cost became the over-

do it well. Like many of those interviewed, "Well, I think the private sector Nitz believes the supervisors will de-

The commission has been meeting twice a week since October, taking testimony from participants in the local system and from outside ex- perts. It is scheduled to report to the supervisors late this month or in