Public Defender Office Sign

Public Defender Office Sign

The Public Defender’s Office represents over 88 percent of New Orleans’ 220,000 criminal and traffic court defendants each year.

The Orleans Public Defender’s Office has continuing budget problems, according to an ABC26 news story by Associated Press.

On December 19, 2010, the Public Defender Office and Louisiana Public Defender Board filed a lawsuit in Baton Rouge, saying Orleans Parish judges are routinely failing to assess mandatory fees on convicted defendants. These fees are supposed to support the public defender office.

“Our office is in such a funding crisis that we just couldn’t afford to wait,” Chief Public Defender Derwyn Bunton said after the announcement of a freeze. He estimated the agency’s budget is about $8 million for the 2009-10 fiscal year.

The hiring freeze will mean fewer attorneys to handle cases over the next six months, he said. This in turn will mean higher caseloads for the roughly 55 attorneys on staff, which will slow the process of cases at Criminal District Court, he said.

Louisiana Public Defenders Sue New Orleans Judges for Refusing to Follow Law
The public defenders say 23 municipal judges have not been collecting a mandatory $35 fee from criminal defendants—money that goes toward paying the salaries of the attorneys. Public defenders in Louisiana make an average annual salary of $40,000, the board claims.
Louisiana was the only state that didn’t fund the cost of public defenders through state and local budgets. But in 2007, the state legislature nearly tripled the amount the state paid for public defense, making it responsible for about 75% of the cost.
Public defenders insist, however, that the $35 fee still needs to be collected by all judges in order to fully fund attorneys appointed for those who can’t afford one.
Some judges say they waive the fee in some cases for those too poor to afford it. Judge Paul Sens, chief judge of Municipal Court, told the New Orleans Times-Picayune that half of the defendants in Municipal Court are poor and many are homeless, mentally ill or drug addicted. Unpaid court fees trigger arrest warrants that send poor defendants to prison, where, because of their inability to pay a $35 fee, they cost taxpayers $22.39 a day to house them in jail.
The public defenders, on the other hand, point out that at the Criminal District Court, the 13 judges last year collected $2.3 million from defendants that went into their own judicial expense fund, but only $54,000 that went to the public defenders.

Where is the problem here? There are several. First, Judges routinely assign the public defenders’ office new clients by the handful in a single Court morning.  Some Judges question defendants who pay thousands of dollars for bail, but won’t pay for an attorney. The Judges understand the danger the Public Defenders Office puts its clients in via caretaker legal aid.

The second big problem is caused by the first- Public Defenders have the magical 150 cases assigned to them at this time. This is very bad for the average defendant!  It routinely means real JAIL time for the average defendant who probably wouldn’t with a decent paid attorney.

The third problem has to do with the funding mechanism, which is broken, as the Judges have been keeping virtually all the money they have been collecting for themselves. Now the Judges need operating money for their offices,  so the real answer is more money from a secure, reliable source for the Public Defenders, not less for the Judges necessarily.

Obviously, like Diversion, the Public Defender’s Office needs better training for its counselors. Cannizzaro, on the Diversion web page, mentions that he has upped the educational requirements for the counselors, requiring them to have a masters degree in social work or counseling. As caretakers for 150 clients each, they don’t get to utilize their training very much.

~ by neworleansmusicman on June 18, 2011.

2 Responses to “150 RULE EXPLAINED Part 2”

  1. […] a crappy world the public defender’s office lives in!  They suffer from the dreaded 150 Rule, when each attorney has 150 clients. This problem occurs in Probation and Parole and Divergence […]

  2. […] trouble with the law.  Putting out fires is the name of the game. I’ve written about this in multiple blog […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: