NCJ Number
85811
Date Published
1982
Length
34 pages
Annotation
Although contract-bid programs to deliver indigent defense services have blossomed, they are considered inappropriate by national standards and model laws.
Abstract
Questionable programs exist in San Diego; Washington State; Boise, Idaho; Vancouver, Wash.; Phoenix, Ariz.; Greenville, S.C.; Michigan; and Philadelphia. In San Diego, where contract bidding has existed for 4 years, costs have skyrocketed by 65 percent. In Washington State, the Criminal Law Section of the State Bar Association recently adopted a resolution opposing the trend toward competitive bidding, which encourages lawyers to reduce services to the lowest level to get the contract. After 2 years of competitive bidding in Boise, Idaho, the county returned to a public defender system. A 1980 Vancouver, Wash., study showed that since adoption of a contract-bid program, there were fewer jury trials and suppression motions and an increase in client complaints. In Michigan, after public hearing and testimony, the Michigan Supreme Court adopted standards for indigent appellate defense services and ordered abolition of contracting for such services within 1 year of its order. Strong national trends in indigent defense, including expansion of the right to counsel, expansion of defense counsel accountability, and centralization of administration and funding of indigent defense services, militate strongly against the use of contract-bidding and suggest compliance with recognized national standards as the wiser course of action. Footnotes are provided. (Author summary modified)