Pretend for a second that you’ve committed a petty crime — shoplifting, for instance. You’re caught, arrested, put in jail, brought in for arraignment, enter a plea, put back in jail and, after all that, finally indicted. But the most important and difficult part has yet to come.
If you happen to have committed a crime, the most integral part of your tussle with the legal system is your trial. According to Wisconsin law, the next three years of your life in prison (at minimum, if you have no prior offenses) are going to be determined by how well your lawyer can argue your case. But what if you can’t afford a lawyer?
The stark reality of legal fees leaves many with either a poorly mounted defense or with no counsel at all. Fortunately, after years of foot-dragging, a recently passed reform has updated the criteria — which hadn’t changed since 1987 — determining who qualifies for public defense. Although the state legislature prefers to be stingy, having vetoed amendments to the state biennial budget in 2003, 2005, 2007 and 2009, public defense legislation can finally give legal protection to those who need it.
Studies show people represented by a well-funded and cohesive public defender’s office receive the equivalent of a private attorney’s legal services. Fortunately for low-income residents, Wisconsin has established one of the best statewide public defender systems and employs both public defender staff attorneys and private practice attorneys to provide excellent legal care. However, only the poorest of the poor are currently eligible. Say by shoplifting, you have committed a misdemeanor. You have a gross wage of about $62.50 a week, have a worn-out car worth $2000 and have only $300 in your bank account. You or any person with these financial means would not qualify for state public defense, even though this is 30 percent of the federal poverty level.
Additionally, eligibility requirements are inconsistent and differ from county to county. Therefore, although someone may be eligible for public defense in one court, in a different county or even in an “adjoining courtroom,” as the Office of the State Public Defender reported, they may be ineligible for defense. Within the same state, it would seem measures differing from courtroom to courtroom is ludicrous, but up until now the state’s penny pinching has prevented the reformatting of an outdated and inutile system.
State Defender Nick Chiarkas told the assembly in the recent vote, “Wisconsin’s standards are the lowest in the country. They are an embarrassment to our state and need to be fixed.” And indeed, Wisconsin’s eligibility standards are one of the two worst in the country (the other being Missouri). What would have prevented the state from passing the updates before? Likely, the state’s biggest concern is the cost. Although allowing more people to obtain public defense will have a cost — an estimated $3.8 million for the fiscal year 2012 — the costs of updating the laws will be offset by savings in county expenditures. If a defendant is unable to obtain a defense, the court system is obligated to appoint a lawyer — at the expense of the taxpayers. The Office of the State Public Defender reported “sixty-nine [of the 72] counties reported spending nearly $6 million in 2008 to appoint counsel.” With an expansion of the criteria for public defense, counties will be able to save money by making fewer court appointments.
According to SPD, for the fiscal year 2009, “The SPD provided legal services to 142,879 indigent clients.” By updating the laws, SPD could provide legal representation for 12,800 more cases annually, which is a significant number of cases for a relatively small budget expansion (or, to taxpayers, more “bang for your buck”.) So why sacrifice our right to an attorney when, in fact, it is more cost-effective to provide more people with better legal care?
Chiarkas said, “In the United States, we have agreed that before the government can take away our liberty, it must first provide us with a fair process. This process is not a gift — rather, it is owed to us… it is due us.” Although concerns over cash have barred the bill from being updated in the past, the updated criteria for 2011 will provide many defendants previously unable to obtain fair process from the law. Although constitutional rights have been glossed over in favor of cost-cutting and legislative snafus have prevented justice in the past, Chiarkas said it will now be provided “for every Wisconsin citizen, no matter how poor, no matter how powerless.”
Taylor Nye ([email protected]) is a freshman majoring in French, English and Spanish.
