NCJ Number
85152
Date Published
1977
Length
122 pages
Annotation
Workshop proceedings are highlighted from a conference that dealt with issues in the implementation of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Argersinger v. Hamlin, which held that no person may be imprisoned unless he/she was represented by counsel at the trial.
Abstract
The foreword to the report examines the findings of a study of the implications of the Argersinger decision and the practical impact on the courts. The study found an alarming lack of compliance with the decision. For the most part, the decision has been ignored or flaunted, and serious attempts are being made to override the intent of the decision. In the workshop on the appointment of counsel, there was consensus that the process for appointing counsel should be conducted by an agency independent of the judge and that the private bar should play a greater role in defending indigents accused of crimes. Consensus in the workshop on defender or counsel management was that something must be done to upgrade the status of misdemeanor case representation, so that the quality of counsel service can be improved. In the workshop on eligibility, there was no consensus about what constitutes indigency, but it was suggested that State legislation authorizing counsel appointment be reviewed and that counsel be appointed for anyone so requesting. Other workshop discussions focus on legislative and rule changes, planning, advocacy methods, and measuring effective assistance of counsel. A list of conference participants is appended.