Documents
- 2022-08-23 -- Complaint
- 2022-12-16 -- Amended Complaint
- 2023-02-01 -- Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification
- 2023-09-21 -- Court Order Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification
- 2023-09-21 -- Court Order Denying Defense Motion to Dimiss
- 2025-01-10 -- Memorandum in Support of Renewed Motion for Class Certification
The suit alleges violations of the right to counsel and requests class certification on behalf of all individuals in the state waiting 14 days or more to have a lawyer assigned to their case and seeks relief including:
- Declaring the delays in receiving appointed counsel violate the right to counsel under the United States and Wisconsin Constitutions.
- Enjoining the state from administering the current public defense system insofar as it deprives eligible individuals from timely receiving counsel.
- Directing the establishment of a constitutional public defense system.
- Directing the State Public Defender to move to dismiss the cases of those without counsel on the basis that their right to counsel is violated when counsel is not promptly provided.
Key Events
- 2022-Aug-23 -- Plaintiff’s Complaint
- 2022-Oct-10 -- Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss
- 2022-Dec-16 -- Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint
- 2023-Jan-30 -- Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint
- 2023-Feb-01 -- Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification
- 2023-Mar-17 -- Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
- 2023-Mar-29 -- Defendant’s Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint
- 2023-Mar-29 -- Defendant’s Brief in Opposition to Motion for Class Certification
- 2023-Apr-17 -- Plaintiff’s Reply in Support of Motion for Class Certification
- 2023-Jun-27 -- Plaintiff’s Motion for Particularized Discovery
- 2023-Jul-06 -- Defendant’s Motion Opposing Particularized Discovery
- 2023-Jul-12 -- Court’s Order for Additional Briefing on Impact of Budget
- 2023-Jul-31 -- Defendant’s Brief on the Impact of the 2023-25 Budget
- 2023-Aug-15 -- Plaintiff’s Brief on the Impact of the 2023-25 Budget
- 2023-Aug-22 -- Defendant’s Reply Brief on the Impact of the 2023-25 Budget
- 2023-Sept-21 -- Court Order Denying Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss
- 2023-Sept-21 -- Court Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification
- 2023-Oct-30 -- Defendant’s Answer and Defenses to Amended Complaint
- 2023-Oct-31 -- Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery
- 2023-Nov-29 -- Defendant’s Opposition to Motion to Compel Discovery
- 2023-Dec-13 -- Plaintiff’s Reply in Support of Motion to Compel Discovery
- 2024-Mar-14 -- Court Order on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery
- 2025-Jan-10 -- Plaintiff's Renewed Motion for Class Certification
Media Coverage
- Class action lawsuit calls out lack of state public defenders by Evan Casey, Wisconsin Public Radio (August 24, 2022)
- Defendants waiting too long for public defenders are entitled to dismissal of charges, suit says by Debra Cassens Weiss, ABA Journal (August 25, 2022)
- Video: The Sixth: Public Defender Shortage by Andy Pierrotti, Investigate TV (Dec. 5, 2022)
- Shortage in public defense attorneys delay court proceedings for defendants by Daniel Gomez, WEAU News (Dec. 8, 2022)
- Why Wisconsin courts need more prosecutors, public defenders by Nathan Denzin, PBS Wisconsin (Jan. 12, 2023)
NACDL in Wisconsin
State v. Nhia Lee
- Wisconsin Supreme Court Order Dismissing Appeal as Improvidently Granted (May 22, 2022)
- NACDL Amicus Brief in Support of Nhia Lee (Aug. 12, 2021)
- State v. Nhia Lee 955 N.W.2d 424 (Jan. 20, 2021) Court of Appeals Opinion, reversing the trial court and remanding the case for further review in light of the Court’s ruling.
2018 Assigned Counsel Rate Petition
NACDL Public Comment in Support of Rate Increase (May 2018)
Press Release (May 16 2018)- Press Release (June 28, 2018)
Wisconsin Bail Manual (October 2018)
Other Public Defense System Litigation of Note
David v. Missouri 20AC-CC00093 (Cole County Cir. Feb. 6, 2023) judgment holding “the State fails in its obligation to provide counsel when it fails to provide counsel . . . within . . . [a] two week period, as such a failure falls below the minimal obligation placed upon the State to appoint counsel within a reasonable time after attachment.” The Court found delays of assigning counsel of more than 2 weeks violated the Missouri Constitution’s right to counsel. Although the state currently has no individuals on its waiting list, the court nevertheless recognized the “history of providing defense counsel for indigent defendants in Missouri is replete with claims of inadequate resources for providing effective representation,” making it critical to address the future use of waiting lists.
