Unnoticed, Untapped, and Underappreciated: Clients' Perceptions of their Public Defenders

Abstract

The challenge of providing high-quality public defense services continues to be a concern at federal, state, and local levels. Some scholars have alluded to a potential solution in client-centered representation, but research in this area is sparse at best. Such a lack of understanding leaves in its place speculation, particularly as to the potential importance of client perceptions in shaping broader system legitimacy. To fill this gap and create an empirical platform for future research, an exploratory pilot study was launched with the Hamilton County, Ohio Public Defender's Office, which used mixed methodologies to assess client attitudes toward public defenders as a potential resource for aiding the improvement of indigent representation. Findings from this pilot study suggest that there are five factors a public defense attorney should address that may prove to be very important in obtaining client satisfaction and cooperation: engaging the client for input, listening to the client, examining the prosecutor's evidence, focusing on the client's case during meetings, and informing the client of potential consequences. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.

Do Perceptions of Legitimacy and Fairness Matter in Prison? Examining How Procedural and Distributive Justice Relate to Misconduct

“…According to Tyler’s (2009) process-based model of regulation, legitimacy operates through an indirect path, which mediates procedurally just actions and compliance. Within the criminal justice system, legitimacy has been defined as the public’s belief that legal agents (i.e., police, courts, and legal system) are appropriate and just in their decision-making (Beijersbergen et al, 2015; Campbell et al, 2015).…”

Attorney–Client Communication in Public Defense: A Qualitative Examination

“…Moreover, a distinctive set of problems undermines attorney–client communication in public defense. Government-paid attorneys have long been seen as lacking the resources, commitment, and independence of privately retained counsel (Campbell, Moore, Maier, & Gaffney, 2015; Casper, 1971). This stereotype is not baseless; public defense is minimally regulated and often underfunded (National Right to Counsel Committee, The Constitution Project, 2009).…”

“…Data from 22 public defense clients revealed new complexities in client experiences with attorney–client communication that include the exercise of personal agency, often due to dissatisfaction with the communication. Legal consciousness theory (LCT; Silbey, 2005) complemented procedural justice theory (PJT; Campbell et al, 2015) in accounting for these complexities. The results of this study have implications for research, theory, policy, and practice related to public defense, and call for increased attention to the potential role of client agency in efforts to improve attorney training, performance evaluation, workload-resource ratios, and outcomes at the case and system level.…”

Isonomy, Austerity, and the Right to Choose Counsel

“…214 To be sure, people facing criminal charges are a notoriously hard-to-reach population for researchers. 215 Indeed, JMI's first survey attempt had a 1% response rate, which was inadequate to generate sufficient data; adding the offer of a $5 Walmart gift card as an incentive generated enough participation to move the study forward. 216 Without understating the significance of the challenges involved in conducting mixed methods research in this setting or questioning the utility of the defendant survey used in this study, it bears mention that other studies with defendant populations have supplemented quantitative methods with interviews and focus groups.…”