The Right to a Good Defense: Investigating the Influence of Attorney Type Across Urban Counties for Juveniles in Criminal Court

Abstract

Juvenile defendants in criminal court represent an especially vulnerable group for whom quality legal representation is critical. While some juvenile defendants are able to obtain private counsel, indigent defendants are provided an attorney by the government. One long-standing concern is that these court-appointed attorneys are less effective. Using data on juveniles in criminal court across 37 large, urban counties, the present study examines conviction and sentencing outcomes by comparing private counsel, public defenders, and assigned counsel. Results indicate that defendants with public defenders were less likely to be convicted, less likely to be incarcerated in prison, and served shorter prison sentences compared to defendants with assigned counsel. Contrary to hypotheses, however, the effect of attorney type was not conditioned by court urbanism. The findings suggest that public defenders provide effective legal representation for juveniles in criminal court. Research is needed to determine whether this holds across different contexts (e.g., rural).

Assessing Variations in Juvenile Court Processing in Urban Versus Rural Courts: Revisiting “Justice by Geography”

“…2. One recent study found that the effect of legal representation on criminal court convictions was not moderated by county urbanism (Zane et al, 2021) 3. Unlike race and sex, age is not clearly an extra-legal variable in the context of juvenile court, where age may be connected to attributions of culpability and potential for reform (see Mears et al, 2014).…”

“… 2. One recent study found that the effect of legal representation on criminal court convictions was not moderated by county urbanism (Zane et al, 2021) …”