Few names in public defense are as iconic as that of Clarence Earl Gideon. In 1961, with an 8th grade education and a history of being in and out of jail, Gideon stood trial for burglary of a Florida pool hall. When the court called the case and asked if he was ready for trial Gideon replied "I am not ready, your Honor." When the judge asked why, he explained "I have no counsel." 

According to NACDL’s recent report surveying the various methods utilized by states to determine when an individual is indigent and entitled to appointed counsel, a majority of the states look to the Federal Poverty Guidelines (FPG) to find out whether a defendant qualifies for court-appointed counsel. On the surface, it would seem that this might be an objective yardstick of indigence, but in practice it proves to be prone to manipulation in myriad ways.

When a person is accused of a crime, the U.S. Constitution guarantees that person the right to a lawyer even if they cannot afford one. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed this basic principle more than a half century ago in Gideon v. Wainwright, and in subsequent cases that expanded the right to misdemeanor prosecutions. Yet this right is violated every day in South Carolina’s magistrate and municipal courts – collectively referred to as summary courts – where scores of people are convicted, sentenced, and sometimes incarcerated, without having been represented by counsel. [Released April 2016]

The Right to Counsel in State Courts

This 50-state Survey of Right to Counsel Standards documents how states decide when a qualifying individual charged with criminal wrongdoing is entitled to receive appointed counsel. Some states only appoint counsel in cases of actual incarceration following conviction, while others mandate appointed counsel based solely on the fact that a defendant has been charged with a crime. Other states fall between these standards and appoint counsel when a sentence of incarceration is authorized or likely to be imposed following conviction. [Released October 2016]

This 50-State Survey of Financial Eligibility Guidelines for Assigned Counsel documents how states decide who is “too poor” to hire a lawyer. The survey looks at how states define “indigency” and whether or not that definition is consistent with ABA standards for providing defense services. It identifies which states rely on the Federal Poverty Guidelines when determining eligibility for assigned counsel, and explains the origin of the Federal Poverty Guidelines and how they cannot accurately predict who is “too poor” to hire a lawyer. [Released March 2014]

This report documents the unreasonably low rates of compensation paid to private attorneys who represent indigent defendants in state courts. The lack of adequate funding restricts the pool of attorneys willing to represent indigent defendants and creates conflicts of interest for attorneys by encouraging them to limit the amount of work they perform on a case for an indigent client. [Released March 2013]

The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers deems that where warranted by the jurisdictional population needs and caseload, a proper public defense delivery system should comprise institutional offices of full-time attorney staff as well as meaningful participation of private attorneys with equal access to training and resources necessary to provide effective criminal defense.

In recent years, there has been growing interest in public defense issues nationwide. Several state and national organizations have filed lawsuits challenging practices that undermine public defense and access to justice. Additionally, the U.S. Department of Justice has intervened in many cases in the form of Statements of Interest, on behalf of the plaintiffs. 

NACDL has launched a 12-month celebration of the Gideon v. Wainwright decision.

NACDL President Gerry Morris's letter to Senator Cory Booker regarding the need for federal funding and support for public defense services, as proposed in the Equal Justice Under Law Act of 2016 (S. 3144).

NACDL President Lawrence Goldman's letter to House Judiciary Committee chair Representative Jim Sensenbrenner regarding the Innocence Protection Act of 2001 (H.R. 912).

NACDL President Barry Pollack's letter to Representative Sean Patrick Maloney regarding the need for federal funding and support for public defense services, as proposed in the Equal Justice Under Law Act of 2017 (H.R. 968).

NACDL President Barry Pollack's letter to Senator Cory Booker regarding the need for federal funding and support for public defense services, as proposed in the Equal Justice Under Law Act of 2017 (S. 328).

Coalition letter to the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies regarding President Barack Obama's request to include in the 2017 federal appropriations bill grant funding for public defense services and support, to continue the "Answering Gideon's Call" initiative.

Highlighting the work of front line public defenders, this series of articles highlights some of the personal challenges public defenders face as they work to ensure the amount of justice a person receives is not determined by the amount of money in their pocket.