Description
After reading the assigned textbook sections and the supplemental material above, what are your thoughts about why the problem with an indigent’s (a poor person’s) limited access to effective legal representation in criminal court exists as the writers believe? In writing your answer and responses, think about the following: Do you agree that this problem can, despite a public defender’s best intentions, affect the outcome of a defendant being found guilty or not guilty because a wealthier defendant can afford more legal resources and public defenders are said to have too large a caseload and are not adequately supported? Why do you believe there are not more government resources put in to public defenders offices and staffing? With the information at hand here, are we as a society or are we as criminal justice professionals ignoring a key constitutional protection? Why or why not?Student 1
Carlos Rangel
One of the many factors that make the United States criminal justice system one of the best systems in
the world is that we are required by law to grant every defendant a defense attorney even if they can
not afford one. However, just because a defendant who cannot afford a defense attorney is granted one
does not mean that they are going to win their case let alone get the best outcome in their case. Public
defenders are constantly occupied with loads of cases and clients because private defense attorneys are
expensive and many defendants can not afford to hire one. That being said many public defenders do
try to the best of their ability to help their clients, but they do not have the time to exclusively help their
client and so many times public defenders will tell their clients to accept the plea bargain that the
prosecution is offering which results in many defendants to serve time in a correctional facility.
According to the text “many criminal lawyers reportedly leave the field because they find the people
that they must interact with to be difficult or distasteful” (chap 8 pg. 223). I can understand this
reasoning because there are certain moral ethics in defense attorneys who are helping release offenders
back into society and this could weigh on their conscience or even attract negative opinions from the
public. But there should be more government resources in the public defender’s office, even though this
occupation does not attract lawyers because of the heavy workload and various difficult clients. I believe
that every lawyer who has just graduated should work a certain number of years in the public
defender’s office before they decide to become a prosecutor or private defense attorney. It would be no
different than the requirement that every HPD officer must work three years in patrol before they are
able to be promoted or work in a specific task force. This would benefit the public by having more
attorneys available to help defendants, some who might even be innocent. And it allows these newly
graduated law students to gain experience and help decide what career path they would like to pursue.
Student 2
Juan Campo
Based on the textbook and the articles, I believe that the writers are correct when a poor person does
not have adequate legal representation in their case—ultimately leading many people to guilty pleas
based on plea bargains. Many factors contribute to how poor people have poor representation. For
example, depending on the state or judges that have been, whether they are republic or democrat, it
will affect how they provide resources and how they pay the public defender, ultimately affecting the
poor. I agree that regardless of the public defender’s intentions, this will affect the poor, irrespective of
whether they plead guilty. For example, plea bargains come with their positives and negatives. One of
the good things about plea bargains is that they prevent our criminal justice system from being
overwhelmed and save time and money for them and the defendant. Some public defenders will
persuade the defendant to plead guilty to face a lesser charge instead of being convicted. Defendants
will tend to assert guilty, although they might be innocent, based on other factors such as the main
factor we are discussing of them being poor or other ones such as having issues in their life such as
providing for their family, not getting support, and other factors. Public defenders will tend to persuade
them into plea ignoring the consequences they will face, such as spending time in jail which could result
in years. I believe that the government does not put the resources for public defenders and staffing
because of the state and how expensive it could be. For example, some states will focus more on
providing their resources for education, health, transportation, or other necessities. They will put
conditions first and give less to public defenders. I think we, as a society, are ignoring that crucial
constitution. For example, those with no trouble with the law will ignore that factor because it won’t
affect them. Moreover, does who have money will seek a private lawyer, which is more likely to defend
them well compared to does who do not get paid well, in which they will focus on their case instead of
having multiple, which leaves a part of the society out in ignoring this issue. This makes sense if you
follow the law and have not been accused of doing something. On the other hand, does who have
committed a crime or are being accused have that problem. I believe some people have that mindset.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
