Attorney Representation in Juvenile Court - A Comparison of Public Defenders and Privately Retained Counsel

• NCJ Number: 95408
• Author(s): P Hancock; K T Van Dusen
• Date Published: Unknown
• Length: 25 pages
• Grant Number(s): 77-JN-99-0012; 78-JN-AX-0034
• Sponsoring Agency: US Securities and Exchange Cmssn
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/; NCJRS Photocopy Services
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

The outcomes of juvenile waiver hearings in two California counties vary according to whether the client is represented by a public defender, private attorney, or court-appointed attorney.

Abstract

Data came from 818 cases in Los Angeles and Alameda counties. These were all the cases subjected to waiver hearings in 1976 and 1977 on which attorney information was available. Cases where the juveniles had previously been found unfit for juvenile court were also excluded. In Los Angeles County, public defenders were much more successful in keeping their clients within the juvenile court, particularly compared to private attorneys. In Alameda County, the court-appointed attorneys were the most successful in keeping their clients in juvenile court. Client differences explained these attorney differences in Alameda County but not in Los Angeles County. However, the small differences among attorney types are important, because no differences should exist if the system is working as intended, and the direction of the relationship between attorney type and hearing outcome is the opposite of what would be expected based on popular belief. The unfavorable image of the public defender is not justified from the data. The Los Angeles County public defenders' familiarity with the juvenile court may explain their results. Data tables and 27 references are supplied.