Failing Gideon

8/4/2019 Failing Gideon

1/100

355North300West

SaltLakeCity,Utah84103

Phone:801.521.9862Facsimile:801.532.2850www.acluutah.org

FailingGideonUtahsFlawedCounty-By-CountyPublicDefenderSystem

AmericanCivilLibertiesUnionofUtah


2/100

FailingGideonUtahsFlawedCounty-By-CountyPublicDefender

System

AReportBy:

TheAmericanCivilLibertiesUnionofUtah


3/100

TableofContents

LetterfromtheExecutiveDirector i

Acknowledgements ii

ExecutiveSummary 1-11

BoxElderCounty 12-19

DaggettCounty 20-24

DuchesneCounty 25-34

IronCounty 35-43

KaneCounty 44-49

SanJuanCounty 50-56

SevierCounty 57-64

UintahCounty 65-73

WeberCounty 74-84

AppendixA:County-by-CountyResourceComparisonChart 85-87

AppendixB:SampleACLUofUtahGRAMARequests 88-92

AppendixC:OtherPublicationsofInterest 93-95


4/100

i

LetterFromtheExecutiveDirector

Whensomeoneisarrestedandchargedwithacrime,therightto

counselisoneofthemostfundamentalrightstheaccusedpersonhas.Thisistrueregardlessofthepersonswealth.AstheUnitedStatesSupreme

Courthasconsistentlyheldsincerenderingitsfamousdecisionin Gideonv.

Wainrightin1963,theSixthAmendmenttotheUnitedStatesConstitution

requiresthatstatesprovideattorneysforallindividualswhoareaccusedof

crimesandwhoareunabletoaffordtheirownlawyers.

Since2008,theACLUofUtahhasbeeninvestigatingwhetherthe

StateofUtahiscomplyingwiththisconstitutionalmandate.Atthetimeour

investigationbegan,weknewthatUtahwasoneofonlytwostatesthat

providednostatefundingforpublicdefenderservices,andthatUtahs

county-by-countyapproachwasfunded,atastatewidepercapitaaverage,at

lessthan45%ofthenationwideaverage.WiththehelpoftheUniversityofUtah,S.J.QuinneyCollegeofLawCivilRightsClinicandprivatesector

cooperatingattorneys,wedelveddeeplyintoeachcountysstructure.The

conclusion?Utahscounty-by-countypublicdefendersystemisfailing,and

indireneedofrepair.Withnofunding,supervisionorguidancefromthe

state,countiesarelefttotheirowndevices.Insomecounties,budgetsfor

publicdefensearelessthan20percentofthemoniesallocatedtothe

prosecution.Inothercounties,publicdefendercaseloadsaresohighthat

theymayhaveeighthoursorlesstohandleeachfelonycase.Thesefactors,

amongothers,placepublicdefendersandtheirclientsatadistinct

disadvantagewithsignificantinequalities.Theresultisnotonlyadenialof

justicetothepoor,butalsohighercoststotheentirejusticesystem.

Webelievethestatisticsandstoriesthatfollowinthisreportamply

demonstrateapressingneedtooverhaulUtahspublicdefensesystem.We

hopethisinformationwillservetoeducateourpublicofficials,membersof

thelegalcommunity,andthepublicaboutthefailingsofourcurrentsystem

soastoinspirethecommitmenttobringaboutthenecessaryreformsto

makeUtahspublicdefensesystemconstitutionallysound.

KarenMcCreary

ExecutiveDirector

ACLUofUtah

[email protected]


5/100

ii

Acknowledgements

Thisreportwouldnothavebeenpossiblewithoutthehelpofmany

individuals.Firstandforemost,thanksgoouttothestudentsenrolledintheUniversityofUtah,S.J.QuinneyCollegeofLawCivilRightsClinic,who

undertheleadershipofAssociateProfessorEmilyChiangassistedat

nearlyeverystageoftheinformation-collectionprocessanddraftedthefirst

roundofthecounty-by-countysectionsofthereport.Thankyou,aswell,to

thegovernmentofficialswhorespondedtoourGRAMArequests(and

especiallytothosewhowaivedourfees),andtoallpastandcurrentpublic

defenders,countyattorneys,andindividualsaccusedofcrimeswho

consentedtobeinterviewedinconnectionwiththisproject.Aspecial

thankstotheattorneysandothersparticularlyKentHart,Executive

DirectoroftheUtahAssociationofCriminalDefenseLawyers,andmembers

oftheACLUofUtahsLegalPanelwhoevaluatedsuccessivedraftsofthe

reportandhelpedguideitintofinalform.Finally,thisreportmightnever

havebeenissuedbutfortheindefatigableACLUofUtahinternAnikka

Hoidal,whospentdays(andweeks)helpingtopreparethereportforfinal

publication.

UniversityofUtah,S.J.QuinneyCollegeofLawCivilRightsClinicStudents

ACLUofUtah ACLUofUtahLegalPanel

SarahBrown

ElizabethButler

RyanCadwallader

FrankChiaramonte

KristyFinlayson

SpencerHall

SamuelHood

StevenJoffee

BrookeJohnson

RussellShaneJohnson

LucyJuarez

KatherineKang

AndrewKolter

JayKronmiller

TylerLindsey

MarkSchwarz

LisaSemanoff

MildaShibonis

JustinYeargin

DarcyM.Goddard,LegalDirector

MarinaLowe,Legislative&PolicyCounsel

EsperanzaGranados,PublicPolicyAdvocate

AnnaBrower,DevelopmentDirector

ReinardKnutsen,OfficeManager

DavidHobbs,IntakeCoordinator

LoriNixon,ExecutiveAssistant

LeahFarrell,intern

MaxGreen,intern

ShehnoorGrewal,intern

TaraPincock,intern

JulieEdwards,formercooperatingattorney

AnnabelleMaurer,contractemployee

JoanReid,volunteer

ZacharyWeyher,formercooperatingattorney

JensieAnderson(currentChair)

KentMorgan(currentViceChair)

LincolnHobbs(formerChair)

JohnBogart

StephenClark

LauraKessler

ClemensLandau

ThomasMitchell

CathyRoberts

TysonSnow

KarenStam

AaronTarin

MaryWoodhead


6/100

FailingGideon:UtahsFlawedCounty-By-CountyPublicDefenderSystem

1

EXECUTIVESUMMARY

[R]eason and reflection, require us to recognize that, in our adversarysystemof criminal justice,anypersonhaled intocourt,who istoo poortohirea lawyer,cannotbe assureda fairtrialunlesscounsel isprovidedfor

him.Thisseemstoustobeanobvioustruth.

-Gideonv.Wainright,372U.S.335,344(1963).

PartI:Gideonv.WainwrightandtheRighttoCounsel

The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the landprotectingallcitizensoftheUnitedStatesandallthoseresidingwithinit.Itisagainstthatbackdropthatourindividualrightsmustbeconsideredandprotected.

InthepopularcultureoftheUnitedStates,wearegenerallyfamiliarwith the FourthAmendment(therightagainstunreasonable searchesandseizures), the Fifth Amendment (the right against compelled self-incrimination), andof coursethe First Amendment (protections forfreedomofspeechandthepress,andtofreedomofreligion).AlthoughwearegenerallylessfamiliarwiththeSixthAmendment,therightsitprotectsarenolessimportant(U.S.Const.,amend.VI(emphasisadded)1):

Inallcriminalprosecutions,theaccusedshallenjoytherighttoaspeedyandpublictrial,byanimpartialjuryoftheStateanddistrictwhereinthecrimeshallhavebeencommitted...to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have

compulsoryprocessforobtainingwitnessesinhisfavor,andtohavetheAssistanceofCounselforhisdefence.

The Supreme Court has interpreted the Sixth Amendment toguarantee,amongotherrights,therighttostate-appointedattorneysforallindividualsaccusedofstatecrimes 2whofacethepossibilityofincarcerationif convicted of the crimes with which they are charged. 3 Gideon v.

1LiketheUnitedStatesConstitution,theUtahStateConstitutionprovides:Incriminalprosecutionstheaccusedshallhavetherighttoappearanddefendinpersonandbycounsel....UtahConst.art.I,12.

2Gideondealtonlywiththerighttocounselinstatecriminalprosecutions.Yearsearlier,inJohnsonv.Zerbst,304U.S.458(1938),theSupremeCourtconcludedthatindigentdefendantsaccusedofcrimesinfederalcourtwereentitledtocourt-appointedcounsel. 3TwoothercasesdecidedbytheSupremeCourtin1972,Argersingerv.Hamlin,407U.S.25,and2002,Alabamav.Shelton,535U.S.654,respectively,affirmedthattheSixthAmendmentguaranteeofcounselencompassestheappointmentofcounselforindividualsaccusedofmisdemeanorsinstatecourt,evenifthejailsentencetobeimposedislatersuspended.


7/100


2

Wainwright,372U.S.335,344(1963)(notingthat,although[t]herightofone charged with crime to counsel may not bedeemed fundamental and

essentialtofairtrialsinsomecountries,...itisinours).

Wheretheaccusedindividualistooimpoverishedtoretainandpayforhisownattorney,theSupremeCourthasrecognizedthatitisincumbentonthestatetoprovidecounsel. SeeGideon,372U.S.at344.AstheGideonCourtrecognized(id.):

Fromtheverybeginning,ourstateandnationalconstitutionsand laws have laid great emphasis on procedural andsubstantive safeguardsdesigned toassurefair trialsbeforeimpartial tribunals in which every defendant stands equalbefore the law. This noble ideal cannot be realized if the

poor man charged with crime has to face his accuserswithoutalawyertoassisthim.

RelyingonlanguagefromPowellv.Alabama,287U.S.45,68-69(1932),4acaseestablishingtherighttoappointedcounselincapitalcases,the GideonCourtexplained:

Even the intelligent and educated layman has small andsometimesnoskillinthescienceoflaw....Leftwithouttheaid of counsel, he may be put on trial without a propercharge, and convicted upon incompetent evidence, orevidence irrelevant to the issue or otherwise inadmissible.

Helacksboththeskillandknowledgeadequatelytopreparehisdefense,eventhoughhehaveaperfectone.Herequirestheguidinghandofcounselateverystepintheproceedingsagainsthim.Withoutit,thoughhebenotguilty,hefacesthe

4Powellv.AlabamaisalsoinfamouslyknownastheScottsboroBoyscase.TheScottsboroBoyswerenineblackteenageboysaccusedofrapingtwowhitewomeninAlabamain1931.Theyweretriedtogetherinfrontofanall-whitejuryonlytwelvedaysaftertheirarrest.[U]ntiltheverymorningofthetrial,nolawyerhadbeennamedordefinitelydesignatedtorepresentthedefendants.Powell,287U.S.at56.Onthemorningoftrial,alldefendantsweredeemedtoberepresentedbytwoattorneyswhowereinexperiencedincriminallawand,inanyevent,weregivennotimetoinvestigateorotherwisetoprepareanadequate

defense.Id.at57.Eightoftheninedefendantswereconvictedandsentencedtodeath.Id.at50.ConcedingthattheSixthAmendmentguaranteedtherighttocounsel,id.at66,theSupremeCourtreversedtheconvictionsontheadditionalgroundthatdueprocesshadbeenviolatedbydefensecounselslackoftimeandopportunitytoprepareanadequatedefense.Id.at71([U]nderthecircumstancesjuststated,thenecessityofcounselwassovitalandimperativethatthefailureofthetrialcourttomakeaneffectiveappointmentofcounselwaslikewiseadenialofdueprocesswithinthemeaningoftheFourteenthAmendment.).


8/100


3

danger of conviction because he does not know how toestablishhisinnocence.

The Supreme Court has also held that state- or court-appointedattorneysmaynot be just anyone, with any setof skills (or lack thereof).Instead, the right to counsel is the right to the effective assistance ofcounsel."5 Strickland v.Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 686 (1984) (emphasisadded) (citingMcMann v. Richardson, 397U.S. 771 n.14 (1970)); see alsoCuylerv.Sullivan,446U.S.335,344(1980)(Therighttocounselpreventsthe States from conducting trialsat whichpersonswho face incarcerationmust defend themselves without adequate legal assistance. (emphasisadded)).

The constitutional mandate is clear and cannot be gainsaid:

individualswhoareaccusedofcommittingcrimesforwhichjailtimemightbe assessed are entitled to appointment, by the state, of constitutionallyadequate, effectivepublicdefenders. Andthisrightmatterstomore thanjust a few people; some estimate that as many as four out of every fivepeopleaccusedofcrimesareeligibleforcourt-appointedcounsel. 6

PartII:PublicDefenseSystemsinUtahandElsewhere

TherearethreeprimarymodelsfortheprovisionofpublicdefenseservicesintheUnitedStates:(i)publicdefenderoffices,whichhavefull-orpart-time salaried employees who provide public defense services, oftenfromasingle,centralizedofficewithsupportstaffandsupportiveresources

(e.g.,SaltLakeCounty,UtahCounty);(ii)assignedcounsel,whoareprivatesector attorneys appointed as necessary on a case-by-case basis, usuallywithanagreementthattheywillbepaidhourly(e.g.,DaggettCounty);and(iii)contractcounsel,whoareprivatesectorattorneysselectedtoprovideon-goingpublicdefenseservicesonacontractbasisforasetcontractualfee.MostUtahcountiesfollowthecontractcounselmodel.

5Althoughseeminglysimpleonitsface,enforcingtherequirementsofeffectivenessandadequacyhasprovendifficult.Evenincaseswherecounselhavebeencaughtsleepingorusingdrugsincourt,orshownupadmittedlyunprepared,courtshavebeenloathetofindthattheservicesprovidedbycounselwereconstitutionallyineffective.SeeDavidCole,NoEqualJustice:RaceandClassintheAmericanCriminalJusticeSystem(NY,NY:TheNewPress

1999),at78-79,citedinJusticePolicyInstitute,SystemOverload:TheCostsofUnder-ResourcingPublicDefense(July2011)(2011JPIReport),at3&n.15,availableathttp://www.justicepolicy.org/research/2756(lastvisitedAug.11,2011).6See2011JPIReport,supranote5,at2&n.3(citing,inturn,ScottWallace&DavidCarroll,ImplementationandImpactofIndigentDefenseStandards(Wash.,D.C.;NatlLegalAid&DefenderAssn2003),ati,availableatwww.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/205023.pdf(lastvisitedAug.11,2011)).


9/100


4

Althoughtheconstitutionalobligationtoprovideadequate,effectiveattorneys rests with the state, the State of Utah fails to live up to its

constitutional obligation. We are not the first to draw this conclusion;almost20yearsago,ataskforcecommissionedbytheUtahSupremeCourtfoundthattherewassuchasignificantproblemwithinconsistentappellaterepresentation of indigents, that it recommended the creation of astatewide appellate public defenders office.7 Utah never adopted thatrecommendation, andwhatwe found (seediscussioninfraatpp.12-84&Appendix A hereto) indicates that its commitment to trial-level publicdefenderservicesisnobetter.

UtahisoneofonlytwostatesintheUnitedStatesPennsylvaniaisthe otherthat provides no state funding or oversight of public defenseservices within the state.8 Instead, in what is essentially an unfunded

mandate,Utahrequiresthateachofits29countiesbearthefullfinancialandadministrativeresponsibilityforprovidingconstitutionallyadequatepublicdefenseservicestothosewhorequirethem.SeeUtahCodeAnn.77-32-301(statingthat[e]achcounty,city,andtownshallprovideforthedefenseofanindigent...).Withnostatesupportoroversight,countiesinUtahspendanaverageofonlyapproximately$5.229percapitaonpublicdefenseservices,whichisonly44percentofthenationalaverageof$11.86.10

County-, as opposed to state-, based funding of public defenderservices is often criticized because it can create patchwork systems in

7

JudicialCouncil,TaskForceonAppellateRepresentationofIndigentDefendants,FinalReport(Sept.14,1994),at2,5.AsecondAppellateTaskForcewasformedin2008(2008AppellateTaskForce).SeeJudicialCouncil,StudyComm.onAppellateRepresentationofIndigentCriminalDefendants,FinalReport(Jan.6,2011)(2011UtahAppellateTaskForceReport),at1.The2011UtahAppellateTaskForceReportagainfoundsignificantproblemswithUtahsprovisionofpublicdefenderservicesonappeal,see,e.g.,id.at3-4(summarizingtaskforcefindingsandrecommendations),andtheworkofthetaskforceencouragedtheJudicialCounciltocommissionasimilargrouptostudytrial-levelpublicdefenderservices.

8NatlLegalAid&DefenderAssociation,GideonsUnfulfilledPromise:TheRighttoCounselinAmerica(Jan.31,2008)(draftreport)(GideonUnfulfilled),at9(onfilewiththeACLUofUtah).Thisissodespitethefactthatmanystates,post-Gideon,havebeenmovingtowardsfullorgreaterstatewidefunding,recognizingthatstatewidefundingstructuresofferanumberofadvantages.See2011JPIreport,supranote5,at4.9NatlLegalAid&DefenderAssociation,ARacetotheBottom:SpeedandSavingsOverDue

Process:AConstitutionalCrisis(2008)(2008NLADAReport)atiii,availableathttp://www.mynlada.org/michigan/michigan_report.pdf(lastvisitedJuly3,2011).

10Seeid.at7.Admittedly,relyingonpercapitaestimatesisanimperfectmeasure,asitnecessarilyovervaluesmoniesspentincountieswithhighnumbersoftransientworkers,visitors,andothers.So,forexample,usingthepercapitameasureinaplacelikeUintahCounty,whichhashighnumbersoftransientoilfieldandotherseasonalworkers,maycreatetheimpressionthatthepublicdefensesystemismoreadequatelyfundedthanitreallyis.


10/100


5

which access to justice could depend on which side of the county line apersonisarrested.11Andtheproblemofpatchworksextendsfarbeyond

just money. Although the Utah Code of Criminal Procedure sets forthminimum standards for public defenseincluding, for example, that thestateaffordtimelyrepresentationbycompetentlegalcounsel,providetheinvestigatory resources necessary for a complete defense, and assureundividedloyaltyofdefensecounseltotheclient,seeUtahCodeAnn.77-32-301(2)-(4)few, if any, of the counties studied in this report have inplaceanysystemstomonitorwhetherthoseminimumstandardsarebeingsatisfied,letalonesystemsforcorrectiveactioniftheyarenot.TheStateofUtah,perhapsnotsurprisingly,iswhollyabsentfromthatprocess.

PartIII:MethodologyofThisReport

In2008, theACLUofUtah sent public information requests underthe UtahGovernmentRecords Access andManagementAct,63G-2-101, etseq., to each of Utahs 29 counties. 12 Each GRAMA request soughtinformationpertainingtothecountysindividualizedsystemforprovidingpublicdefense,including:

Qualifications for public defenders; Procedures for advertising and evaluating bids for public defender

contracts;

Public defender contract terms; Public defense budgets; and Systems to track public defender caseloads, quality of services

provided, and actual or potential conflicts of interest.

WerequestedsimilarinformationfromeachCountyAttorneysofficesothatwecouldcompareresourcesbetweenthetwo.13

11See2011JPIReport,supranote5,at4&n.21(citingApril27,2011,telephoneinterviewwithJamesNeuhard,FormerDirectoroftheStateAppellateDefenderOfficeofMichigan).MichigansconstitutionallydeficientpublicdefensesystemisunderlegalchallengebytheACLUofMichiganinacaseentitledDuncanv.Michigan.Informationonthatcaseisavailableathttp://www.aclu.org/racial-justice/duncan-et-al-v-state-michigan-executive-summary(lastvisitedAug.5,2011).SimilarlawsuitshavebeenbroughtbyvariousACLUaffiliatesin,forexample,Montana,seehttp://www.aclu.org/racial-justice/aclu-files-class-action-lawsuit-

against-montanas-indigent-defense-program(lastvisitedAug.5,2011),andNewYork,seehttp://www.nyclu.org/node/1483(lastvisitedAug.5,2011)andhttp://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/16/nyregion/16defenders.html?scp=1&sq=%22public%20defenders%22&st=cse(lastvisitedAug.5,2011).12AsampleACLUofUtahGRAMArequestfrom2008isattachedtothisreportinAppendixB.13Ourdesiretocomparethetwoishardlysurprising.AstheSupremeCourtnotedinGideon,thesignificantmonetaryresourcesspentonprosecutorsand,wherepossible,criminal


11/100


6

Afteranalyzingthedocumentsreceivedinconnectionwithour2008GRAMArequests,werealized that ananalysisofall 29countieswouldbe

unwieldy, at best. We decided instead to analyze the public defendersystems in a smaller, but diverse, array of counties14: Box Elder County,Daggett County, Duchesne County, Iron County, Kane County, San JuanCounty,SevierCounty,UintahCounty, andWeberCounty. Wealsobegantheprocessofincreasingpublicawarenessoftheproblemswesawasweexaminedpublicdefendersystemsacrossthestate.15

In 2009, to ensure that we had the most updated informationpossible,wenowincooperationwiththeUniversityofUtah,S.J.QuinneyCollege of Law Civil Rights Clinic (under the supervision of AssociateProfessorofLawEmilyChiang)senteachcountyasecondGRAMArequest,andfollowedupinsomecountieswithadditionalcorrespondencein2010. 16

Wealsoreliedonpubliclyavailableinformationsuchascountycommissionboard minutes, public officials salaries, and budget information filedannually by the counties with the State Auditors Office. We conductedinterviews and observed court proceedings in the targeted counties, andsentadditionalpublicinformationrequeststothirdparties,suchastheUtahAdministrative Office of the Courts. We also obtained and analyzedhundredsofreportsfromUtahresidentswhohadreceivedpublicdefenderservicesinthevariouscounties.17

We then compiled and compared all the data against informationfrom otherstatesdescribingtheirpublic defender systems,andpublishedreports assessing the pros and cons of various forms of public defender

systems throughout the country. We also assessed the information we

defenseattorneysreflectvitaltruthsaboutourcriminaljusticesystem.See372U.S.at344(Thatgovernmenthireslawyerstoprosecuteanddefendantswhohavethemoneyhirelawyerstodefendarethestrongestindicationsofthewidespreadbeliefthatlawyersincriminalcourtsarenecessities,notluxuries.).Ourcomparisonofthebudgetsofpublicdefenderswhodefendagainstcriminalaccusationsversusthecountyattorneyswhoprosecutethemwas,inaword,alarming.Seediscussioninfraatpp.7-10&AppendixA.

14Wefeltstronglythatdemographicdiversitywasimportant.Werealized,forexample,thattolookonlyatDavis,Summit,andWeberCountieswouldnecessarilyskewthedatatowardproblemsinherentinurbanareas,whiletoignorethemcompletelyinfavorofmoreruralcountiessuchasCarbon,SanJuan,andWaynewouldskewthedataintheoppositedirection.Wealsowantedtoanalyzethepublicdefendersystemsincountiesfromthroughoutthestate,

ratherthan,forexample,onlythoseontheWasatchFront.15See,e.g.,MarinaLowe,IndigentDefenseinUtah:ConstitutionallyAdequate?,UtahBarJournal(UtahBarAssn,Nov./Dec.2009).

16AsampleACLUofUtahGRAMArequestfrom2009isattachedtothisreportinAppendixB.17 Althoughanecdotal,wefoundthesereportstobehelpfulevidencewhenassessingtheon-the-groundeffectsofeachcountyspublicdefensesystem.


12/100


7

collectedagainst,forexample,publishedreportsanalyzingfundingofpublicdefense nationwide,18and national standards for public defense systems

suchas the AmericanBarAssociations (ABA)TenPrinciplesof aPublicDefense Delivery System19 and the U.S. Department of Justice NationalAdvisoryCommission(NAC)standardsforpublicdefendercaseloads. 20

PartIV:SummaryResults

Whatwesawconfirmedthatourinitialconcernswerewell-founded:in every county we studied, the public defender system fails Gideon inalmostevery(ifnotevery)respect.

Publicdefendersinthecountieswestudiedappeartobechronicallyunderfundedandoverworked,withsomehandlingcaseloadsthat,basedon

the contract fee, result in$400 (or less)per felonyor felonyequivalent.21

Those same caseloadsmay result in an average of less than10 hours tospendoneachsuchcase.22Andthosefiguresdont(andcant)fullyaccountforeitherthe non-case-relatedexpenses that thesepublic defendersmustdeduct from their contract fee for overhead and other costs (such as

18See,e.g.,2008NLADAReport,supranote9;2011JPIReport,supranote5;GideonUnfulfilled,supranote8.

19SeeAmericanBarAssociation,TenPrinciplesofaPublicDefenseDeliverySystem(Feb.2002)(ABATenPrinciples),at1,availableathttp://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/legalservices/downloads/sclaid/indigentdefense/tenprinciplesbooklet.pdf(lastvisitedJuly4,2011).

20NACguidelinesstate:[T]hecaseloadofapublicdefenderofficeshouldnotexceedthefollowing:feloniesperattorneyperyear:notmorethan150;misdemeanors(excludingtraffic)perattorneyperyear:notmorethan400;juvenilecourtcasesperattorneyperyear:notmorethan200;MentalHealthActcasesperattorneyperyear:notmorethan200;andappealsperattorneyperyear:notmorethan25.U.S.Dept.ofJustice,NatlAdvisoryCommnonCriminalJusticeStandards&Goals,TaskForceonCourts,Courts13.12(1973).

21Felonyequivalentcasetotalswerederivedbydividingtheattorneysmisdemeanorcaseloadby2.66(therelativefelonyweightunderstandardspromulgatedbyNAC)andaddingthatnumbertotheattorneysfelonycaseload.OtherormiscellaneouscasesarenotincludedintheNACfelonyequivalentforlackofastandardweight,buttheyareincludedintheTotalCasescalculation.

22Asonestudynotes:Oneofthesinglemostimportantimpedimentstothefurnishingofqualitydefenseservicesforthepooristhepresenceofexcessivecaseloads....Unfortunately,noteventhemostableandindustriouslawyerscanprovidequalityrepresentationwhen

theirworkloadsareunmanageable.Excessiveworkloads,moreover,leadtoattorneyfrustration,disillusionmentbyclients,andweakeningoftheadversarysystem.AmericanBarAssociation,GuidelinesfortheAppointmentandPerformanceofDefenseCounselinDeathPenaltyCases(reviseded.Feb.2003)(ABAGuidelinesForDeathPenaltyCases),at39(quotingAmericanBarAssociationStandardsForCriminalJustice:ProvidingDefenseServices,Standard5-5.3cmt.(3ded.1992)),availableathttp://www.nacdl.org/sl_docs.nsf/issues/ABADPGuidelines/$FILE/ABA_DPGuidelines2003.pdf(lastvisitedJuly4,2011).


13/100


8

insurance or continuing education) or for the additional civil or othermatterstheymighthandleoutsidetheircriminaldocket.

Moreover, after comparing each countys public defense budgetagainst the budget for thevarious county attorneys,we found staggeringdiscrepancies.Publicdefenderbudgetsroutinelyfallintherangeof25-35percentofthecountyattorneysbudgets,withlittleornomoniessetasideinthe public defense budgets for investigative, expert, or other resourcesnecessary to build an adequate defense in many cases. A full budgetcomparison for all nine counties included in this report is contained inAppendix A. Not surprisingly, chronic underfunding of public defensesystemscan,intheend,generateadditional,hiddencoststothetaxpayersintheformofover-incarcerationbothpre-andpost-trial,increasedpressuretopleadguilty,andwrongfulconvictions.23

Note,aswell,that this already-alarmingresourcedisparitydoesnttakeintoaccountthenumerousnon-budgetedresourcesavailabletocountyattorneys,butnot topublicdefenders,in supportofthecountiescriminalprosecutions.Thoseresourcesinclude,butarenotlimitedto:readyaccesstolawenforcement;state-fundedforensicservices;expertwitnesses;state-fundedprosecutorsforjuvenileandcertainothercases;andfreeorlow-costcontinuinglegaleducationclassesprovidedbytheUtahProsecutionCouncilandothers.Inaddition,therearepotentiallysubstantialfundsavailabletothevariouscountyattorneysofficesthroughtheUtahStatewideAssociationofProsecutors.

Equally troubling, inmany countiesweexamined,we learned thatthe county attorney (orotherpotentiallybiased individual)has ahand inselectingwhich attorneys will be awarded the public defender contracts.Wefurtherlearnedthat,ineverycountyweexamined,therearenoformalsystemsinplacetotrackpublicdefendercaseloads,monitorperformance,screen for conflicts of interest, or otherwise to oversee the on-goingprovisionorqualityofpublicdefenderservices.

Finally, in no county we studied were there sufficient (if any)minimumqualificationsor criteria to actually be a publicdefender. As aresult, some of the public defenders we saw are extremely new to thepracticeoflaw,e.g.,2-3yearsoutoflawschool,whichmeanstheyhavelittle

to no prior experience with criminal (or any other) law, and some haveproducedsuchdubiousworkproductastohavebeenrepeatedlychastisedbythecourts.

23See,e.g.,2011JPIReport,supranote5,at18-27.


14/100


9

When comparing these nine Utah counties against the ABAs TenPrinciples,itisnothardtoseewhya2008nationalreportdeterminedthat

Utahwasrightfullyplacedintheauthorslowestpossiblecategory,GideonIgnored.24Indeed,asviewedagainsteachandeveryoftheTenPrinciples,the realities of Utahs county-by-county public defender system indicatesystemicfailure:

ABAPRINCIPLE UTAHREALITY

1-Thepublicdefensefunction,includingtheselection,funding,andpaymentofdefensecounsel,isindependent.

Countyattorneysroutinelyhelpselectpublicdefenders,andmayalsohelpnegotiatethetermsoftheircontracts.

2-Wherethecaseloadissufficientlyhigh,thepublicdefensedeliverysystemconsistsofbothadefenderofficeandtheactiveparticipationoftheprivatebar.

Therearenosystemsinplacetotrackcaseloads,andthuslittletonoabilitytoengagetheprivatebarwhennecessary.

3-Clientsarescreenedforeligibility,anddefensecounselisassignedandnotifiedofappointment,assoonasfeasibleafterclientsarrest,detention,orrequestforcounsel.

Wewereadvisedthatclientsoftenwaitweeksforeveninitialmeetingswiththeirpublicdefenders,andthatthosemeetingsoftenoccuratthecourthouseinthe5-10minutesbeforecourtappearances.

4-Defensecounselisprovidedsufficienttimeandaconfidentialspacewithinwhichtomeetwiththeclient.

Seeabove.

5-Defensecounselsworkloadiscontrolledtopermittherenderingofqualityrepresentation.

Therearenosystemsinplacetotrackcaseloadsorqualityofrepresentation.

6-Defensecounselsability,training,andexperiencematchthecomplexityofthecase.

Therearefew,ifany,writtencriteriaorminimumqualificationsforpublic

defenders,andnoon-goingmonitoringofabilityortraining.

7-Thesameattorneycontinuouslyrepresentstheclientuntilcompletionofthecase.

Unknown.

8-Thereisparitybetweendefensecounselandtheprosecutionwithrespecttoresourcesanddefensecounselisincludedasanequalpartnerinthejusticesystem.

Resourcedisparitiesaresignificant,withcountyattorneysroutinelyreceiving3-5timesthebudgetallocatedtopublicdefense.

9-Defensecounselisprovidedwithandrequiredtoattendcontinuinglegaleducation.

Therearenorequirementsforcontinuingeducation,andpublicdefendercontractsrarelyincludeanymoniessetasideforthatpurpose.

10-Defensecounselissupervisedandsystematicallyreviewedforqualityandefficiencyaccordingtonationallyandlocallyadoptedstandards.

Therearenoproceduresinplacetosupervisepublicdefenders,ortomonitorthequalityorefficiencyoftheirservices.

24SeeGideonUnfulfilled,supranote8,at7.


15/100


10

Overall, we determined that, in most counties we studied, publicdefenders caseloads are so high as to effectively preclude timely

representationoftheirindigentclients. SeeUtahCodeAnn.77-32-301(2).And, inmany counties, those caseloads may also beso high as to rendercompetent representation impossibleregardless of the dedication orskillofthepublicdefender.

Similarly, there is a systemic deficiency in providing theinvestigatoryresourcesnecessary fora complete defense, id.at77-32-301(3), and no systems whatsoever to ensure the undivided loyalty ofdefensecounseltotheclient,id.at77-32-301(4).

Finally, because in none of the counties we studied were publicdefenders precluded from maintaining private practices, the counties

completefailuretomonitorcaseloadsandconflictsmaycauseproblemsnotjustwhenthepublicdefenderhasconflictsasbetweenhiscourt-appointedclients,butalsowhenthepublicdefendermustweightheneedsofcourt-appointedclients against thoseclientswho arewilling and able topayanhourlyrate.

PartV:Conclusion

As discussed above, and asmore fully detailed below, the State ofUtahs county-by-county public defense system is constitutionallyinadequate. It places at risk not just the rights set forth in the SixthAmendmentoftheUnitedStatesConstitutionandarticleI,sectiontwelveof

theUtahStateConstitution,butalsothelivesandlivelihoodsofeverysingleUtahresidentwhoisaccusedofcommittingacrimeandwhocannotaffordtoretainprivatecounsel.

Therisksofsuchadeeplyflawedsystemshouldnotbeviewedintheabstract.Considerwhatyouwoulddoifyourdaughterorsonwerechargedwith a felonyrightfullyorwrongfullyand thecasewere assigned to apublic defender who had only 10 hours to devote to the case, or whosecompensation for thematterwouldcome out toonly $400nomatter theoutcome.Andthenaskyourself:wouldthatbeenoughforyou?Becauseifthe answer isno, then your answershould similarly be nowhenUtahsunderfunded, under-resourced, and under-managed county-by-county

publicdefensesystemaffectsanyonesdaughter,oranyonesson,anywhereinUtah.

Of course, recognizing the myriad problems presented by Utahscounty-by-countypublicdefensesystemisonlythefirststepinformulatingand implementing a solution. Certainly, the state must be held to the


16/100


11

constitutionalmandatesetforthintheSixthAmendmentandacknowledgedin Gideon; the qualityof justicemeted out in the State ofUtahs criminal

courtscannotdependonthewealthoftheaccused,oronthelocationofherarrestortrial.Butthereareconceivablyanumberofapproachesthatcouldlead tocrafting a solutionof county andstate involvement thatwouldberesponsivetoUtahspoliticalandgeographicrealities.Whetherassistancefrom thestatecomes in theformofstatewide standards andoversight ofcountyorregionalpublicdefenderoffices,coupledperhapswithsubstantialfundingallocatedbythestatetosubsidizecountiespublicdefensebudgets,orinsomeotherform,itcannotreasonablybedisputedthatassistancefromthestate,inoneformoranother,isnecessary.

Hopefully,thisreportwilladdtoor,forsome,sparkthebeginningofimportant discussionsbyandamong the stakeholders throughout the

state who, like the ACLU of Utah, caredeeply about finding a solution toUtahsconstitutional failures.25This includesnotonly the electedofficialsandotherpoliticalleaderswhohavethepowertoenactchange,butalsothejudges, public defenders, prosecutors, private sector criminal defenseattorneys,andotherswhobysharingtheirobservationsandexpertisecanhelpleadtheway.

25Wenote,forexample,theon-goingeffortsofthecurrentJudicialCounciltaskforceontrial-levelpublicdefense.Supranote7.Thoseindividualsmanyofwhomalsoservedonthe2008AppellateTaskForce,seeid.reflectadiversearrayofbackgroundsandpoliticalinterests.Webelievetheyalsoshareourgoalofeffectingsignificant,meaningful,andlong-lastingchangestoensurethattheStateofUtahstartsmeetingitsconstitutionalobligationsunderGideon.


17/100


12

BOXELDERCOUNTY

SUMMARY

Box ElderCounty has a population of 49,97526; the largest city isBrighamCity.27BoxElderCountyhasalowerpovertyrate(9.6%)thantheUtahStateaverage (11.7%).28

Infiscalyear2010(July1,2009-June30,2010),216feloniesand74misdemeanors were filed in the District Court for Box Elder County.29Another 1,343 misdemeanors were filed in the Box Elder County justicecourts.30

BoxElderCounty,likeallothercountiesinUtah,receivesnomoney

fromthestateforpublicdefenderservices. BoxElderCountyspendsonlyapproximately $3.43 per capita on public defense services,31which is 29percentofthenationalaverage($11.8632)and66percentoftheUtahstateaverage($5.2233).

26See2010U.S.CensusestimatesforBoxElderCounty,availableathttp://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/49/49003.html(lastvisitedJune7,2011).Utahstotalpopulationin2010was2,763,885.Id.

27See2010U.S.CensusdataforBrighamCity(pop.17,899),availableforsearchanddownloadathttp://quickfacts.census.gov/cgi-bin/qfd/demolink?49(lastvisitedJune4,2011).

28Seehttp://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/povertyrates/PovListpct.asp?st=UT&view=Percent&

longname=Utah(lastvisitedMay29,2011)(printoutonfilewiththeACLUofUtah).29UtahAdministrativeOfficeoftheCourts,FiscalYear2010UtahCourtsCaseload,FirstDistrictCourtforBoxElderCounty(July1,2009-June30,2010),availableathttp://www.utcourts.gov/stats/files/2010FY/district/1-Box_Elder.pdf(lastvisitedJune27,2011).

30UtahAdministrativeOfficeoftheCourts,FiscalYear2010UtahCourtsCaseload,BoxElderCountyJusticeCourt(July1,2009-June30,2010),availableathttp://www.utcourts.gov/stats/files/2010FY/justice/1-Box_Elder.pdf(lastvisitedJune27,2011).ThejusticecourtsforBoxElderCountyhandlecasesfiledbyseveralentities,e.g.,BrighamCity,inadditiontoBoxElderCounty,andmany(ifnotmost)justicecourtcasesdonotinvolvetheappointmentofcounsel.WeareadvisedthatrelativelyfewBoxElderjusticecourtcasesarefiledbyBoxElderCountyandthereafterassignedtotheBoxElderCountypublicdefenders.Thatislikelytrueinothercounties,aswell.

31See2010AdoptedBudgetforBoxElderCountyat2(BoxElder2010Budget),availableforsearchanddownloadathttp://www.sao.state.ut.us/lgReports.html#(lastvisitedJune27,2011);seealsoU.S.CensusBureau,State&CountyQuickFactsBoxElderCounty,Utah(Nov.4,2010),availableathttp://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/49/49003.html(lastvisitedJune27,2011).In2010,BoxElderCountysestimatedpopulationwas49,975,whichdividedintothetotalpublicdefensebudgetof$171,500equals$3.43percapita.

322008NLADAReport,supranote9,at7.33Seeid.atiii.


18/100


13

BoxElderCountycontractsyearlywith a privatelaw firm, Ogden-basedAllen,Richards&Pace,P.C.(ARP),forallpublicdefenseservices. 34

Theyearlycontractamountis$171,500,ofwhich$2,000isdesignatedforexpenses.35Thiscontractamountisintendedtocovernotonlythedefenseattorneystime,butalsotheiroverheadexpenses,continuinglegaleducationcosts, support staff, and other expenses necessary to put together anaccurateandthoroughdefense.

By contrast, the County Attorneys 2010 budget was $563,954nearly three times as muchincluding a line item reflecting a $2,340allowance solely for cell phone service.36 Add to that the near unlimitedaccessenjoyedbytheCountyAttorneysofficetopoliceofficersandvictimadvocates(whooftenareallowedtotestifyasexperts)andtostate-paid-forforensic services, and one can reasonably estimate that the resources

allocatedtotheCountyAttorneyarelikelyclosertofourtimestheamountofthepublicdefendersbudget.

34SeeAttorneyAgreementdatedNov.18,2008,producedinresponsetoACLUofUtahGRAMArequestdatedSept.15,2009(BoxElderAttorneyAgreement)(onfilewiththeACLUofUtah).ARPiscomprisedofpartnersBernardAllen,RandyRichards,andJonathanPace,andassociateattorneysBrittanyBrownandJasonRichards.See,e.g.,http://arplegal.com/(lastvisitedJuly4,2011).BernardAllen,onbehalfofthefirm,provides

muchofthepublicdefenseservicesinBoxElderCounty.RandyRichardsisacontractappellateattorneyinWeberCountyandaformerWeberCountyPublicDefender.JonathanPaceisaWeberCountyPublicDefenderhandlingjuvenilecases.Inadditiontotheirpublicdefensework,atleastMessrs.AllenandRichardsmaintainactiveprivatepractices,includingprivate-clientcriminaldefenseworkandvariedcivilmatters.

35BoxElder2010Budget,supranote31,at2.

36Id.at6-7.

$175,000.00 $171,842.00 $171,500.00 $170,929.00 $171,423.67

$511,793.00 $526,243.00$563,954.00 $551,198.00 $547,131.67

FY2009Budget FY2009Actual FY2010Budget FY2011Budget 3-yearaverage*

BOXELDERCOUNTY

PublicDefender CountyAttorney


19/100


14

Whenasked,BoxElderCountycouldnotprovideanydocumentationdemonstratingthatit has inplaceanypoliciesorprocedurestoguarantee

thator even to monitor whetherindividual defendants in Box ElderCountyreceivequalitydefenseservices. 37Forexample,thereareapparentlynosystemsinplacetoscreenforconflictsofinterest,totrackcaseloads,ortoensureconsistentandcompetentrepresentation. 38

To further compound this lack of oversight, the Box Elder CountyCommission relies on the advice and input of the courts and the CountyAttorneyhimselfinawardingandrenewingthepublicdefendercontract. 39AllowingtheCountyAttorneysuchadirectandinfluentialroleinchoosingthepublicdefendersisinconsistentwiththefirstoftheABAsTenPrinciplesbecause,astheABAexplains40:

The public defense function should be independent frompoliticalinfluenceandsubjecttojudicialsupervisiononlyinthesamemannerandtothesameextentasretainedcounsel.To safeguard independence and to promote efficiency andquality of services, a nonpartisan board should overseedefender,assignedcounsel,orcontractsystems.

37SeeJan.22,2010,Resp.byBoxElderCountytoACLUofUtahGRAMArequestdatedSep.15,

2009(2010BoxElderResp.),at1-2(onfilewithACLUofUtah).38Seeid.at1-3.

39SeeBoxElderCountyCommissionMinutesdatedNov.18,2008(Nov.18,2008,BoxElderCommissionMinutes),at4-5,availableforsearchanddownloadathttp://www.boxeldercounty.org/agendas-and-minutes-2008.htm(lastvisitedJuly4,2011).

40SeeABATenPrinciples,supranote19,at1-2.


20/100


15

DETAILEDPUBLICRECORDSINFORMATION:BOXELDERCOUNTY

STANDARDS&OVERSIGHT BoxElderCountycontractswiththelawfirmAllen,Richards&Pace

(ARP) for public defense services.41 The firm is responsible forproviding legal representation to [d]rug court participants andindigentpersonsinallmattersandappealstherefromforwhichthe[county]isobligatedtopayforindigentlegalservices. 42

BoxElderCountydoesnot43:

o Supervisetheongoingprovisionofpublicdefenseservices;o Require public defenders to participate in continuing legal

education;or

o Monitorthecaseloadsofpublicdefenders. BoxElderCountydoes nothave anywrittencriteria or guidelines

for44:o Selectingcounseltorepresentindigentdefendants;o Ensuringthatpublicdefendersmeetminimumqualifications

orperformancestandards;oro Analyzing the adequacy of compensation for public

defenders.CONFLICTSOFINTEREST

BoxElderCountyhasnoproceduresinplacetoscreenforconflictsof interest,45relying instead, it appears, on the public defenders,CountyAttorney,andjudgestorecognizeconflictsofinterestastheyarise. Even leaving aside the necessarily ad hoc nature of thatprocess (or lack thereof) to screen for conflicts of interest, as apracticalmatteritwouldbedifficultforthoseentitiesto:(i)monitoreachindividualcaseinwhichapublicdefenderappears;(ii)identifyactual orpotential conflicts of interest in each such case; and(iii)analyze whether each and every actual or potential conflict ofinterestwarrantsdisqualification.

41SeegenerallyBoxElderAttorneyAgreement,supranote34.42Seeid.at2.

43See2010BoxElderResp.,supranote37,at1-3.

44Seeid.at1-4.

45Seeid.at3.


21/100


16

InBoxElderCounty,publicdefendersarerequiredtopayforconflictcounseloutoftheirbasecontract.46Thisisinherentlyproblematic.

It may discourage public defenders from identifying conflicts andhiring conflict counsel and, if conflict counsel is retained, it mayincentivize public defenders to retain the least expensive conflictcounseltheycanfind.

TheBoxElderCountyCommissionreliesontheadviceandinputofthe courts and the County Attorney himself in awarding andrenewing the public defender contract.47 In 2008, the Box ElderCountyAttorneyarguedthatrenewingthecontractwithARP(thenRichards,Caine,Allen&Pace)waspreferabletoacceptingthebidofcompetitor firm Grover&Beins because theCountyAttorneywasverypleasedwith[ARPs]work.48Atthattime,ARPsbidwasalso

$7,500 lower than the competitors and did not allow forrenegotiationevenifcaseloadsweretodramaticallyincrease. 49

FUNDING&RESOURCES

Box Elder County spends $3.43 per capita on public defenseservices,50oronly29percentofthenationalaverageof$11.86.51

BoxElderCountys2010adoptedbudgetallocates$171,500forall

publicdefenseservices,whichincludes$2,000forexpensesincurredbypublicdefensecounsel.52

By contrast, the County Attorneys 2010 total budget was$563,954.53

46SeeBoxElderAttorneyAgreement,supranote34,at9.

47In2008,forexample,CountyCommissionerClarkDavisadmittedthathedidnotknowenoughaboutthe[publicdefenders]and[thatherelied]ontheexpertiseofthecountyattorneysofficetohelpdecidewhoshouldbeawardedthepublicdefendercontract. See11/18/08BoxElderCommissionMinutes,supranote39,at4-5.

48

Seeid.49Seeid.

50Seecalculations,supranote31.

512008NLADAReport,supranote9,at7.

52BoxElder2010Budget,supranote31,at2.

53Seeid.at6-7.


22/100


17

CompensationforPublicDefendersv.CountyAttorneysOffice

In addition to salaries, for fiscal year 2011 Box Elder County has

budgetedforthefollowingexpensesfortheCountyAttorneysOffice:

officespace;employeebenefits($126,248);officesupplies($5,000);books, subscriptions and professional association dues ($14,020);travel reimbursement ($3,000); professional and technical costs($10,000);andeducationandtraining($1,500).56

An additional $46,430 has been budgeted to pay for Box ElderCountys victims witness advocate in fiscal year 2011.57 Victimswitnessadvocatesareoftenallowedtotestifyasexpertwitnessesincriminal cases, thereby alleviating theneed for theprosecution tohireanoutsideexpert.

Becausethe attorneys atARPare contractworkers,asopposed toemployees of the county, the contract provides no monies foroverhead, support staff, administrative expenses, or employmentbenefitssuchashealthinsurance,workerscompensation,sickleave,vacation,orpension.58

Box Elder Countys public defense contract provides that certain

defense costs such as transcript fees,witness fees, expertwitnessfees,andmentalexaminationfees,maybereimbursedbythecountyonacase-by-casebasissolongastheexpensesarefirstapprovedby

54Id.at2.

55Salariesformanypublicemployees,includingthoselistedinthischart,canbesearchedand

reviewedathttp://utahsright.com/(lastvisitedJune3,2011).

56See2011AdoptedBudgetforBoxElderCounty(BoxElder2011Budget),at3,availableforsearchanddownloadathttp://www.sao.state.ut.us/lgReports.html#(lastvisitedJune27,2011).

57Seeid.

58BoxElderAttorneyAgreement,supranote34,at7.

PUBLIC

DEFENDERS

CONTRACT54 COUNTYATTORNEYSOFFICE SALARY/WAGE55

ARP $171,500 StephenHadfield(countyattorney) $100,000

BrandonMaynard(prosecutor) $70,210

KirkMorgan(p/tprosecutor) $58,149

LoreenHenry(legalsecretary) $31,232

JuliaAnnWardle(p/tlegalsecretary) $23,539

PDTotal $171,500 CountyAttorneysOfficeSalaryTotal

$283,130


23/100


18

theCourtasreasonable.59Nosuchpre-approvalisrequiredoftheCountyAttorneysOffice,whichalsohasaccess tocity,county, and

statelawenforcementresourcesandforensicservices.CASELOADS

Infiscalyear2010(July1,2009-June30,2010),216feloniesand74misdemeanors were filed in the District Court for Box ElderCounty.60Another1,343misdemeanorswerefiledintheBoxElderCountyjusticecourts.61

Mr. Allen,who handles muchof thepublic defenderwork forBoxElderCounty,enteredanappearanceascounselin120felonycasesand55misdemeanorcases,includingonecapitalhomicide,overthe

yearbetweenOctober2009andSeptember2010.62

SettingasideMr.Allensrepresentationinthecapitalcase(andanycivil matters in which he is counsel), his total annual criminalcaseloadthe equivalent of 140 felonies when the misdemeanorsare weighted and added 63approaches the maximum of 150felonies recommended under the longstanding professionalguidelinespromulgatedbyNACin1973.64

WhenMr.Allenscriminalcaseloadisanalyzedtoincludehiscapitalcaseload,aswell,thepotentialforoverloadisstarkerstill.Accordingtoonestudy,theaveragetimerequiredtolitigateacapitalcasefrom

appointmentofpublicdefensecounselthroughtrialis1,889hours. 65This is one reason why some statesalthough not Utahstrictlylimitcaseloadsforattorneyswhorepresentcapitaldefendants.

59Id.at8.

60Supranote29.

61Supranote30.

62SeeOct.2010Resp.byUtahAdmin.OfficeoftheCourtstoACLUofUtahGRAMArequestdatedOct.22,2010(2010UtahAOResp.)(onfilewiththeACLUofUtah).Notethatthesefiguresmayactuallyunderstatethetotalnumberofcaseshandledinanygivenyearbyanypublicdefender,becauseeachpublicdefenderwillberesponsiblenotonlyfornewlyassignedcasesbutalsoforcasespendingfrompreviousyears.SeeU.S.Dept.ofJustice,Bureauof

JusticeStatistics,County-BasedandLocalPublicDefendersOffices2007(Sept.2010,NJC231175)(2007DOJPublicDefendersReport),at8,availableathttp://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/clpdo07.pdf(lastvisitedJuly4,2011).

63Supranote21.

64Supranote20.

65SeeABAGuidelinesForDeathPenaltyCases,supranote22,at40.


24/100


19

Assuming,wethinkconservatively,thateachcapitalcasetakesthree

years to adjudicate through trial, such that defense counsel canexpect tospendanaverage of630hoursper yearoneach capitalcase,thenanattorneyhandlingonecapitalcasewhoworksfor40hours a week, 50 weeks a year (with two weeks set aside forvacation),willhave1,370hourslefttohandletheremainderofhiscaseload.(40hours/weekx50weeks=2,000hours;2,000hours630hours=1,370hours.)

InMr.Allenscase,thatwouldleaveonly1,370hourstohandle,in

addition tohis miscellaneous andcivilmatters, theequivalent of140 felonies. That leaves less than 10 hours per felony. (1,370hours/140felonies=9.79hours/felony.)

Asonestudynotes:Oneofthesinglemostimportantimpediments

to the furnishing of quality defense services for the poor is thepresenceofexcessivecaseloads....Unfortunately,noteventhemostable and industrious lawyers can provide quality representationwhen their workloads are unmanageable. Excessive workloads,moreover, lead to attorney frustration, disillusionment by clients,andweakeningoftheadversarysystem.66

66Seeid.at39.WehavenotreceivedcomplaintsindicatingthatindigentdefendantsinBoxElderCountyhavefoundMr.AllenoranyofhiscolleaguesatARPtobeexcessivelybusyorotherwisedeficientintheirprovisionofpublicdefenderservices.


25/100


20

DAGGETTCOUNTY

SUMMARY

Daggett County has a population of only 1,059 people.67 DaggettCountyhas a significantly lower poverty rate (6.6%) than the Utah Stateaverage(11.7%).68

Infiscalyear2010(July1,2009-June30,2010),onlythreefelonies

andtwomisdemeanorswerefiledintheDistrictCourtforDaggettCounty.69Another138misdemeanorswerefiledintheDaggettCountyjusticecourts. 70DaggettCounty spends approximately $3.96 per capita on public defenseservices,71which is 33 percent of the national average ($11.8672) and 76percentoftheUtahstateaverage($5.2273).

DaggettCountydoesnothaveapublicdefendercontract.Instead,itutilizesassignedcounselonacase-by-casebasisatapproximately$50/hour.This hourly rate is intended to cover the attorneys time and all otherattorney expenses relating to thecase. AlthoughDaggett Countysbudgetusedtoincludealineitemof$200allocatedforindigentprofessionalfees

67See2010U.S.CensusestimatesforDaggettCounty,availableathttp://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/49/49009.html(lastvisitedJune2,2011).

68Seehttp://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/povertyrates/PovListpct.asp?st=UT&view=Percent&

longname=Utah(lastvisitedMay29,2011)(printoutonfilewiththeACLUofUtah).69UtahAdministrativeOfficeoftheCourts,FiscalYear2010UtahCourtsCaseload,FirstDistrictCourtforDaggettCounty(July1,2009-June30,2010),availableathttp://www.utcourts.gov/stats/files/2010FY/district/8-Daggett.pdf(lastvisitedMay29,2011).

70UtahAdministrativeOfficeoftheCourts,FiscalYear2010UtahCourtsCaseload,DaggettCountyJusticeCourt,(July1,2009-June30,2010),availableathttp://www.utcourts.gov/stats/files/2010FY/justice/8-Daggett.pdf(lastvisitedMay29,2011).

71SeeDaggettCountyattorneyinvoicesforyears2006-2010producedinresponsetoACLUofUtahGRAMArequestdatedSept.16,2009(DaggettAttorneyInvoices)(onfilewiththeACLUofUtah),at6-87,93-107;seealsoU.S.CensusBureau,State&CountyQuickFactsDaggettCounty,Utah(Nov.4,2010),availableathttp://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/49/49009.html(lastvisitedJune27,2011).DaggettCounty,unlikemostothercountiesstudiedforthisreport,doesnotlistitspublicdefenderbudgetasaseparatelineiteminits

annualbudgetsorfinancialreports.Asaresult,whencalculatingDaggettCountyspublicdefenseexpenditures,wereliedonattorneyinvoicesproducedbyDaggettCountyinresponsetoanACLUofUtahGRAMArequest.Thelastfullyearforwhichinvoiceswereproducedwas2009.In2010,DaggettCountysestimatedpopulationwas1,059,whichdividedintothe2009totalpublicdefensebudgetof$4,197equals$3.96percapita.


73Id.atiii.


26/100


21

forpublicdefenders,74itisunclearwhatthatwasintendedtocoverand,inanyevent,wedidnotfindanyrecordofanypublicdefenderactuallybilling

separatelyforsuchservicesintheyears2006-2010.75

Bycontrast,thebudgetfortheCountyAttorneysOfficehasaveraged$95,032overthelastthreeyears.76

Whenasked,DaggettCountycouldnotprovideanydocumentationdemonstratingthatit has inplaceanypoliciesorprocedurestoguaranteethatoreventomonitorwhetherindividualdefendantsinDaggettCountyreceive quality defense services.77 Despite the low case load in DaggettCounty, thereareapparentlynosystemsinplacetoscreenforconflictsof

interest, to track caseloads, or to ensure consistent and competentrepresentation.78

74SeeDaggettCountybudgetmaterials,producedinresponsetoACLUofUtahGRAMArequestdatedSept.16,2009(DaggettBudgetMaterials),at2-5(onfilewiththeACLUofUtah).

75SeeDaggettAttorneyInvoices,supranote71,at6-87,93-107.

76

See2009AdoptedBudgetforDaggettCountyat4,and2010AdoptedBudgetforDaggettCountyat4,bothavailableforsearchanddownloadathttp://www.sao.state.ut.us/lgReports.html#(lastvisitedJune27,2011).

77SeeJuly15,2008,NotesofTelephoneInterviewwithDaggettCountyClerksOfficeinconnectionwithACLUofUtahGRAMArequestdatedMay13,2008(2008DaggettResp.),at1(onfilewiththeACLUofUtah).

78Seeid.

$10,300.00 $4,185.00 $7,500.00 $- $5,842.50

$90,300.00$81,306.00

$107,500.00$96,290.00 $95,032.00


DaggettCounty



27/100


22

DETAILEDPUBLICRECORDSINFORMATION:DAGGETTCOUNTY

STANDARDS&OVERSIGHT Joel Berrett, who practices in Roosevelt (and thus must travel

approximately 100miles eachway toget toand from theManillacourthouse) appears to be the attorney most frequentlyhired forpublicdefensecases.79

Twootherattorneysprovideconflictcounselonanadhocbasis:o John Beaslin: In addition to acting as conflict counsel, Mr.

Beaslin was until Fall 2010 one of two contract publicdefendersinUintahCounty.HewasreimbursedbyDaggettCountyonlyoncebetween2006and2010.80

o HerbGillespie: Inadditiontoprovidingservicesas conflictcounsel,Mr. Gillespiewas substituted forMr. Berrett in atleast one Daggett County case.81 He is also the contractpublicdefenderforjuvenilecasesinDuchesneCounty.

DaggettCountydoesnot82:


education;oro Monitorthecaseloadsofpublicdefenders.

DaggettCountydoesnothaveanywrittencriteriaorguidelinesfor 83:

o Selectingcounseltorepresentindigentdefendants;o Ensuringthatpublicdefendersmeetminimumqualifications

orperformancestandards;o Analyzing the adequacy of compensation for public

defenders;o Determining and reassigning counsel based on conflicts of

interest;o Evaluating and approving public defenders billings for

services;or

79SeeDaggettAttorneyInvoices(Berrett),supranote71,at6-81.

80SeeDaggettBudgetMaterials,supranote67.Mr.BeaslinceasedbeingapublicdefenderinUintahCountyinFall2010.Wewereunabletodeterminewhetherheisstillpracticing.Seediscussioninfraatnote325.


82See2008DaggettResp.,supranote77,at1.

83Seeid.at1.


28/100


23

o Appealing rejected reimbursement requests by publicdefenders.

Whenasked,DaggettCountywasalsounabletoproduceanywritten

policiesorproceduresfor84:o Trackingthenumberofprosecutionsfiled; o Classifyingprosecutionsbytypeor byassignment towhich

countyattorney;oro Trackingthenumberofcriminalcasestriedorsettled.

CONFLICTSOFINTEREST

Daggett Countywas unable to produce anywritten requirements,policies,orstandardsforevaluatingpotentialstructuralconflictsof

interestforattorneyscontractingforpublicdefenseworkinDaggettCounty, and the County apparently keeps no record of publicdefendercaseassignmentsordecisionstosubstitutecounsel.

FUNDING&RESOURCES

Daggett County spends approximately $3.96 per capita on publicdefense services,85which is 33 percent of the national average of$11.86.86DaggettCountyreceivesnostateappropriationsforpublicdefenseservices.

COMPARISONOFDAGGETTCOUNTYFUNDINGANDSUPPORT

TOTALPUBLICDEFENSEBUDGET 87:2008-$15,8002009-$10,3002010-$7,500

TOTALCOUNTYATTORNEYBUDGET88:2008-$77,8002009-$90,3002010-$107,500

ReimbursementstoAttorneys 89:2008-$3,5632009-$4,1852010-$75290

ContractedCompensation 91:2008-$62,0002009-$66,0002010-$66,000

84SeeMarch25,2010,Resp.byDaggettCountytoACLUofUtahGRAMArequestdatedOct.21,2009(2010DaggettResp.),at1(onfilewiththeACLUofUtah).CountypersonnelindicatedthattheywereworkingtocreatetheserecordsasofMarch25,2010,andexpected

tocompletethembyApril1,2010.Thoserecordswereneverreceived.85Seecalculationssupranote71.



88See2009AdoptedBudgetforDaggettCountyat4,and2010AdoptedBudgetforDaggettCountyat4,bothsupranote76.


29/100


24

Inadditiontothecontractamountspaidtothethreeattorneyswhoprovide services as countyattorneys,DaggettCountypays for the

following expenses of the Daggett County Attorneys Office: officespace;printercopyingexpenses,recordsstorage,subpoenaservice,discoveryandinvestigation,andtravelreimbursements. 92

Becausethepublicdefenders arecontractworkers, asopposed toemployeesofthecounty,theyareprovidednomoniesforoverhead,supportstaff,administrativeexpenses,oremploymentbenefitssuchashealthinsurance,workerscompensation,sickleave,vacation,orpension. The contractedpublic defendersarereimbursed only fortheirtravelexpenses.93

89SeeDaggettAttorneyInvoices,supranote71,at6-87,93-107.Thepublicdefenderreimbursementrateremainedstaticat$50/hourfrom2006to2010.Id.

90Amountsfor2010publicdefenderreimbursementswereestimatedbasedonattorneyinvoicesreceivedfortheperiodJanuary1-March31,2010.Thatisthemostrecentdatawe

haveavailable.91SeeDaggettCountyAttorneyContractsdatedJan.2,2009,producedinresponsetoACLUofUtahGRAMArequestdatedSept.16,2009,at4-5(onfilewiththeACLUofUtah).Perthosedocuments,CountyAttorneyservicesareprovidedbythreemutuallycovenantattorneys.

92Seeid.



30/100


25

DUCHESNECOUNTY

SUMMARY

Duchesne County has a population of 18,60794; the largest city isRoosevelt.95 Duchesne County has a slightly lower poverty rate (10.6%)thantheUtahStateaverage (11.7%),96andalsohasasignificantlyhigher-than-average Native American population (4.5% compared to 1.2%statewide97).

In fiscal year 2010 (July1,2009-June30, 2010), 405 felonies and417misdemeanorswerefiledinthedistrictcourtsforDuchesneCounty. 98Another 439 misdemeanors were filed in the Duchesne County justicecourts.99

DuchesneCounty,likeallotherUtahcounties,receivesnomoneyforpublicdefenseservices.DuchesneCountyspendsapproximately$9.41percapita on public defense services,100which is 79 percent of the national

94See2010U.S.CensusestimatesforDuchesneCounty,availableathttp://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/49/49013.html(lastvisitedJune7,2011).

95See2010U.S.CensusdataforRoosevelt(pop.6,046),availableforsearchanddownloadathttp://quickfacts.census.gov/cgi-bin/qfd/demolink?49(lastvisitedJune4,2011).

96Seehttp://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/povertyrates/PovListpct.asp?st=UT&view=Percent&longname=Utah(lastvisitedMay29,2011)(printoutonfilewiththeACLUofUtah).

97See2010U.S.CensusestimatesforDuchesneCounty,availableathttp://

quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/49/49013.html(lastvisitedJune7,2011).98UtahAdministrativeOfficeoftheCourts,FiscalYear2010UtahCourtsCaseload,FirstDistrictCourtforDuchesneCounty(July1,2009-June30,2010),availableathttp://www.utcourts.gov/stats/files/2010FY/district/8-Duchesne-Duchesne.pdf(lastvisitedMay29,2011)andhttp://www.utcourts.gov/stats/files/2010FY/district/8-Duchesne-Roosevelt.pdf(lastvisitedMay29,2011).

99UtahAdministrativeOfficeoftheCourts,FiscalYear2010UtahCourtsCaseload,DuchesneCountyJusticeCourt(July1,2009-June30,2010),availableathttp://www.utcourts.gov/stats/files/2010FY/justice/8-Duchesne.pdf(lastvisitedMay29,2011).

100See2010AdoptedBudgetforDuchesneCounty(Duchesne2010Budget)at6,availableforsearchanddownloadathttp://www.sao.state.ut.us/lgReports.html#(lastvisitedJune27,2011);seealsoU.S.CensusBureau,State&CountyQuickFactsDuchesneCounty,Utah(Nov.4,2010),availableathttp://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/49/49013.html(lastvisitedJune27,2011).WehadtoestimatethecountyspublicdefensebudgetbecauseDuchesneCounty,

unlikemostothercountiesstudiedforthisreport,doesnotlistitspublicdefenderbudgetasaseparatelineiteminitsannualbudgetsorfinancialreports.The$175,000estimateisbasedon(i)whatweunderstandthepublicdefenderssalariestobe,(ii)reviewoftheprofessionalandtechnicalcontractsfiguresfromDuchesneCountys2010and2011budgets(lineitem4965),and(iii)discussionswithcertaincriminaldefenseattorneys.In2010,DuchesneCountysestimatedpopulationwas18,607,whichdividedintothetotalestimatedpublicdefensebudgetequals$9.41percapita.


31/100


26

average of $11.86.101 As noted previously, however, using the per capitameasure in a place like Duchesne County, which has high numbers of

transient andotherseasonalworkers,maycreate theimpressionthat thepublic defense system ismore adequately funded than it really is.102Webelieve that is the case inDuchesne County,where all evidence indicatesthatno matter its per capita spendingthe public defense system isconstitutionallydeficient.

Until recently, Duchesne County contracted with two privateattorneys to handle non-juvenile cases 103 : Roland Uresk104 and MareaDoherty. 105 In Fall 2010, Mr. Uresk declined to renew his contract,apparentlycitingasaprimaryreasonthepoorcompensationofferedbythecountyi.e.,approximately$61,167annuallytocovernotonlyhistime,butalsohisoverheadexpenses,continuinglegaleducationcosts,supportstaff,

and other expenses necessary to put together an accurate and thoroughdefense.106GivenMr.Uresksapproximateannualcriminalcaseloadof130felonies and 59 misdemeanors107 (for a NAC felony equivalent of 152feloniesperyear108),hiscontractwithDuchesneCountyaffordedhimonly

1012008NLADAReport,supranote9,at7.102Seesupranote10.

103InoraroundJanuary2011,DuchesneCountyhiredaSaltLakeCity-basedlawfirm,Morrison&Morrison,tohandleMr.Uresksapproximately50percentoftheDuchesnepublicdefenderdocket;MsDohertycontinuestohandletheotherapproximately50percent.SeeDuchesneCountyCommissionMinutesdatedJan.31,2011,at1,availableathttp://duchesne.utah.gov/images/1-31-11_reg.pdf(lastvisitedJune15,2011).Athirdpublic

defender,HerbGillespie,handlesonlyjuvenilecases.SeeDuchesneCountyCommissionMinutesdatedDec.6,2010(Dec.6,2010,CommissionMinutes),at2,availableathttp://duchesne.utah.gov/images/commission/2010/12-06-10_reg.pdf(lastvisitedJune15,2011).

104SeeDuchesneCountyCommissionMinutesdatedJan.7,2008,at1,availableathttp://duchesne.utah.gov/images/departments/commission/2008/2008-01-07.pdf(lastvisitedJune15,2011),

105Ms.DohertytookoverthecontractfromStephanieMiyaonoraboutJanuary12,2009.SeeDuchesneCountyCommissionMinutesdatedJan.12,2009,at3,availableathttp://duchesnegov.net/clerkauditor/2009minutes/01-12-09%20reg.pdf(lastvisitedJune15,2011).

106SeeAgreementforLegalServices,RolandUresk,JusticeCourts(Jan.7,2008-Dec.31,2010)(UreskJCAgreement),producedbyDuchesneCountyinresponsetoACLUofUtahGRAMA

requestdatedMay13,2008,at2($6,000annuallyforjusticecourtcases)(onfilewithACLUofUtah);AgreementforLegalServices,RolandUresk,DistrictCourt(Jan.7,2008-Dec.31,2010)(UreskDCAgreement),producedbyDuchesneCountyinresponsetoACLUofUtahGRAMArequestdatedMay13,2008,at2(a)-(c)(by2010,$55,166.80annuallyfordistrictcourtcases)(onfilewithACLUofUtah)(collectively,UreskAgreements).

107See2010UtahAOResp.,supranote62.

108Supranote21.


32/100


27

about $400 per felony or felony equivalent. ($61,167/152 felonies =$402.41/felony.)

ContrastthesenumberswiththeDuchesneCountyAttorneysOffice,whichin2010hadatotalbudgetof$488,845almostthreetimeswhatwasbudgeted for public defense services.109 Included in that budget weresalaries for the County Attorney ($78,790), two deputy county attorneys($65,499and$65,562),andthreelegalsecretaries(withanaveragesalaryof$39,811).110 Employee benefits for those six workers totaled another$125,379.111

When asked, Duchesne County was unable to produce anydocumentationdemonstratingthatithasinplaceanypoliciesorprocedures

toguarantee thatoreven tomonitorwhetherindividual defendantsinDuchesneCountyreceivequalitydefenseservices.112Thereareapparentlynosystemsinplacetoscreenforconflictsofinterest,totrackcaseloads,orto ensure consistent and competent representation.113 Instead, all that isrequired by contract is that the attorney provide competent legalrepresentationwith no explanation ofwhat that might mean, let alone

109SeeDuchesne2010Budget,supranote100,at5.

110SeeApril8,2010,Resp.byDuchesneCountytoACLUofUtahGRAMARequestdatedFeb.16,2010(2010DuchesneResp.),at2-3(onfilewithACLUofUtah);seealsohttp://utahsright.com/salaries.php?city=duchesne_county(lastvisitedJuly4,2011),a

websiteonwhichmanypublicsectoremployeessalaries,includingtheseattorneys,canbesearchedandreviewed.

111See2010DuchesneResp.,supranote110,at2.

112SeeMay29,2008,Resp.byDuchesneCountytoACLUofUtahGRAMARequestdatedMay13,2008(2008DuchesneResp.),at1-2(onfilewithACLUofUtah).

113Seeid.

$187,000 $166,809 $175,000 $175,000 $172,270

$491,250 $455,128 $488,723 $488,532 $477,461


DuchesneCounty



33/100


28

how it might be enforcedand attend all appearances in all criminalproceedingsinwhichrepresentationisbeingprovidedby[the]Attorney. 114

DuchesneCountyapparentlyhas noprocedures inplace toscreenforconflictsofinterest;asweunderstandit,DuchesneCountyreliesinsteadon the judge presiding over the case to monitor and, if appropriate,disqualifytheattorneyforaconflictofinterest. 115Tofurthercompoundthislackofoversight,theDuchesneCountyCommissionreliesontheadviceandinput of the County Attorney when deciding to whom public defendercontractsshouldbeawarded.116

114See,e.g.,DuchesneCountyCommissionMinutesdatedJan.22,2007(Jan.22,2007,CommissionMinutes),at3,availableathttp://duchesne.utah.gov/images/departments/commission/2007/2007-01-22.pdf(lastvisitedJune15,2011).

115See,e.g.,UreskDCAgreement,supranote106,at5.

116WhenMr.UreskdecidednottorenewhispublicdefendercontractinFall2010,theCountyCommissionerscontactedtheCountyAttorneysofficetoseeifheknowsanythingaboutthepublicdefendercontractsbeforemovingforwardwithfindingareplacement.SeeDuchesneCountyCouncilMinutesdatedDec.13,2010,availableathttp://

duchesne.utah.gov/images/departments/commission/2010/12-13-10_reg.pdf(lastvisitedJune11,2011).TheCountyAttorneysOfficewasinvolvednotjustinselectingthereplacementpublicdefender,butalsoindecidingthematerialtermsofthepublicdefendercontract.SeeDec.27,2010,DuchesneCountyCommissionMinutesdatedDec.27,2010(Dec.27,2010,CommissionMinutes),availableathttp://duchesne.utah.gov/images/departments/commission/2010/12-27-10_reg.pdf(lastvisitedJune11,2011).ThisviolatesthefirstoftheABAsTenPrinciples,supranote19.


34/100


29

DETAILEDPUBLICRECORDSINFORMATION:DUCHESNECOUNTY

STANDARDS&OVERSIGHT DuchesneCountyhirespublicdefendersasindependentcontractors

through an open bid system.117 There are no written policies orguidelines governing selection of public defenders.118 Attorneysneed only be licensedto practice law in the State ofUtah and aresidentof, orwillingtorelocate to,DuchesneCounty.119Publicdefendersarepermittedtomaintainseparateprivatepractices.

Until Fall 2010, Duchesne County contracted with three private

attorneys to provide public defense services: Marea Dohertyprovided public defense services to approximately half of the

defendantsin district court;RolandUreskprovided public defenseservices to the otherhalf and toall indigent defendants in justicecourt;andHerbGillespieprovidedalljuvenilecourtpublicdefenseservices.120

Mr.Ureskdeclinedtorenewhiscontractattheendofitsfirstterm.

Ms. Dohertyrenegotiated her contract inMarch2011 to include a

contractfeeof$67,200(describedassixtypercent(60%)oftheonehundred twelve thousand ($112,000.00) budgeted for thisexpense),withathreepercentincreaseeachyear.121Ms.Dohertysnew contract also includes a provision allowing for up to $1,000

annuallyforreimbursementofCLEclasses. 122

ThelawfirmMorrison&Morrison,L.L.C.tookoverthesecondpublicdefendercontractinearly2011.ThecontracthasbeendescribedasalmostthesameastheonesignedbyMs.Doherty.123Presumably,however, the firmscompensation isapproximately$44,800,or 40

117See,e.g.,Dec.14,2006,LettersfromDuchesneCountyPersonnelOfficeandMay27,2008,NoticeofAdvertisementofPublicDefenderPosition,producedbyDuchesneCountyinresponsetoACLUofUtahGRAMArequestdatedMay13,2008(onfilewithACLUofUtah).

118See2008DuchesneResp.,supranote112,at1-2.

119SeeMay27,2008,NoticeofAdvertisementofPublicDefenderPosition,supranote117.

120Supranote103.121SeeDuchesneCountyCommissionMinutesdatedMarch28,2011,at2(Mar.28,2011,CommissionMinutes),availableathttp://duchesne.utah.gov/images/3-28-11_reg.pdf(lastvisitedJuly4,2011).

122Id.

123Id.


35/100


30

percentofwhat thecountydescribed as the onehundred twelvethousand($112,000.00)budgetedforthisexpense.124

Noneof thepublic defender contracts inDuchesneCountycontain

any meaningful criteria governing the quality of defense servicesthat must be provided. Instead, they require only that publicdefenders must provide competent legal representation andshouldattendallappearancesinallcriminalproceedingsinwhichrepresentationisbeingprovidedby[the]Attorney. 125

Inthepast,thepublicdefendercontractshavealsorequiredthatthe

public defendermust establish localcommunications (phone) andanability tomeet locallywithdefendantsto effectively serve theirneeds on a local basis.126 We have been unable to determine

whether that contractual provision still exists. Wenote, however,that such a provisionwouldbe nearly impossible to enforce if, asDuchesneCountyhasacknowledged,thecountydoesnotsupervisetheongoingprovisionofpublicdefenseservices.127

DuchesneCountydoesnot128:


education;oro Monitorthecaseloadsofpublicdefenders.

124Id.WewereunabletofindadditionalinformationinthepublicrecordconcerningthetermsofMorrison&Morrisonscontract.TheCountyCommissionMinutesconcerningtheappointmentstateonly,CommissionerWintertonstatedthataftertheinterviewprocess,theinterviewcommitteecametotheconclusionthatMorrison&Morrisoniswhotheywouldliketoextendthecontractto.SeeDuchesneCountyCommissionMinutesdatedJan.31,2011,at1(Jan.31,2011,CommissionMinutes),availableathttp://duchesne.utah.gov/images/1-

31-11_reg.pdf(lastvisitedJuly4,2011).125See,e.g.,Jan.22,2007,CommissionMinutes,supranote114,at3;seealsoUreskDCAgreement,supranote106,at3,11(requiringcompetentlegalrepresentation).

126SeeUreskDCAgreement,supranote106,at8.

127See2008DuchesneResp.,supranote112,at1-2.

128Id.


36/100


31

Duchesne County does not have any writtenpolices or guidelinesfor129:

oSelectingcounseltorepresentindigentdefendants;

o Ensuringthatpublicdefendersmeetminimumqualificationsorperformancestandards;or

o Analyzing the adequacy of compensation for publicdefenders.

CONFLICTSOFINTEREST

ItappearsthatDuchesneCountydoesnothavewrittenpoliciesorprocedures for identifying conflicts of interest, and that it insteadreliesonthepresidingjudgetodisqualifyattorneyswhenconflictsofinterestarise.130

FUNDING&RESOURCES

DuchesneCountyspendsapproximately$9.41percapitaonpublicdefenseservices,131which is79percent of the national averageof$11.86.132

Unlikemostothercounties,DuchesneCountydoesnotlistitspublic

defender budget as a separate line item in its annual budgets orfinancial reports. We estimate that Duchesne Countys budgetallocation forpublicdefender services is approximately $175,000forfiscalyear2011.133

Bycontrast,DuchesneCountys2011budgetallocates$488,532to

the CountyAttorneysOffice134roughly 2.5 timesmore than thebudget for public defense services. Although we do not havedetailed information for fiscal year 2011, the 2009 CountyAttorneysbudget($491,250) included, forexample, a $3,400 lineitemfortelephoneservice.135

129Id.

130See,e.g.,UreskDCAgreement,supranote106,at5.

131Seecalculationssupranote100.1322008NLADAReport,supranote9,at7.

133Seecalculations,supranote100.

134See2011AdoptedBudgetforDuchesneCountyat5,availableathttp://www.sao.state.ut.us/lgReports.html#(lastvisitedJune27,2011).



37/100


32

CompensationforPublicDefendersv.CountyAttorneysOffice

In addition to salaries, Duchesne County pays for the following

expenses of the County Attorneys Office: office space; employeebenefits($125,379inFY2009);travelandtrainingexpenses;officesupplies;booksandsubscriptions;andotherequipment.138

Because the public defenders in Duchesne County are contractworkers, as opposed to employees of the county, their contractsprovide no monies for overhead, support staff, administrativeexpenses,oremploymentbenefitssuchashealthinsurance,workerscompensation,sickleave,vacation,orpension.

DuchesneCountyspublicdefensecontractprovidesthatthecounty

will pay for certain indigent transcript costs, investigatory, and

expert-witness costs approved by the Court.139

No such pre-approval by theCourt is required of theCountyAttorneysOffice,which also has access to city, county, and state law enforcementresourcesandforensicservices.

Duchesne Countys public defender contract also provides that

travel, telephone, postage, and office expenses shall be theresponsibilityoftheAttorney.140

136SeeMar.28,2011,CommissionMinutes,supranote121,at2;Jan.31,2011CommissionMinutes,supranote124,at1;Dec.6,2010,CommissionMinutes,supranote103,at2.


138Id.

139See,e.g.,Jan.22,2007,CommissionMinutes,supranote114,at3,4.

140Seeid.

PUBLIC

DEFENDERS

CONTRACT136 COUNTYATTORNEYSOFFICE SALARY/WAGE137

MareaDoherty $67,200 StephenFoote(countyattorney) $78,790

Morrison&Morrison(est.)

$44,800 CharlesGrant(prosecutor) $65,499

HerbertGillespie $55,073 JonathanStearmer(prosecutor) $65,562

LoreenHenry(legalsecretary) $31,232

DennieFoote(legalsecretary) $42,162

ElaineDespain(legalsecretary) $36,525

PDTotal(est.) $167,073 CountyAttorneysOfficeSalaryTotal

$319,770


38/100


33

CASELOADS

In fiscal year 2010 (July1,2009-June30, 2010), 405 felonies and417 misdemeanors were filed in the district courts for DuchesneCounty.141Another 439misdemeanorswere filed in theDuchesneCountyjusticecourts.142

Mr.Ureskenteredanappearanceascounselinatleast130felonies,59misdemeanors,andatleast8miscellaneouscasesover theyearbetweenOctober 2009 andSeptember2010.143 Settingaside anycivil matters in which he was counsel, Mr. Uresks total annualcriminal caseloadthe equivalent of 152 felonies whenmisdemeanorsareweightedandadded 144exceedsthemaximumof150 felonies recommended under the longstanding professional

guidelinespromulgatedbyNACin1973.145

Assumingthatanattorneywillworkfor40hoursaweek,50weeksayear(withtwoweekssetasideforvacation),heorshewillhaveatotalof2,000hourstoallocatetocasework.(40hours/weekx50weeks= 2,000hours.) InMr.Ureskscase,evenexcludinghis civilcaseload, that schedule would result in only about 13 hours perfelony.(2,000hours/152felonies=13.16hours/felony.)Again,thattakesintoaccountonlyhiscriminalwork,anddoesnotfactorinanymiscellaneousorcivilmatters.

WhendeterminingwhichattorneyorfirmshouldreplaceMr.Uresk

in December 2010 and January 2011, the County Commissionexplicitly declined to accept caseload limits as part of the newcontract.146

Another factor worth noting when assessing the ability of publicdefenders in rural areas, such as Duchesne County, to provideconstitutionallyadequatepublicdefenderservicesisthesubstantialtravelthatcanbeinvolved.BothMr.UreskandMs.Dohertypracticein both Duchesne and Uintah Counties, for example, and it is anapproximately two hour roundtripdrive fromDuchesne toVernal.

141

Supranote98.142Supranote99.

143See2010UtahAOResp.,supranote62.

144Supranote21.

145Supranote20.

146SeeDec.27,2010,CommissionMinutes,supranote116,at2.


39/100


34

Substantialtravelisoneofthefactorsreferencedasimportantwhenassessinganygivenpublicdefenderscaseload.147

147SeeABAGuidelinesforDeathPenaltyCases,supranote22,at39-40n.112(notingthat,althoughmanyorganizationshaveconsideredtheissueofmaximumacceptablepublicdefendercaseloads,onlyNAChassetforthnumericalstandards,andNAChasurgedthatitsnumbersareprovidedwiththecaveatthatparticularlocalconditionssuchastraveltimemaymeanthatlowerlimitsareessential.).


40/100


35

IRONCOUNTY

SUMMARYIronCountyhasapopulationof46,163148;thelargestcityisCedar

City.149IronCountyhasasignificantlyhigherpovertyrate(18.3%)thantheUtahStateaverage (11.7%).150

In fiscal year 2010 (July1,2009-June30, 2010), 499 felonies and233 misdemeanors were filed in the district courts for Iron County.151Another1,511misdemeanorswerefiledintheIronCountyjusticecourts.152Iron County spends approximately $4.42per capitaon non-capital publicdefense, 153 which is 37 percent of the national average of $11.86 percapita.154

IronCountycontractswithtwoprivateattorneys,JackBurnsandJefferySlack,eachat$70,000annually,tohandleallpublicdefensecasesinthedistrictandjusticecourts.155BothMr.BurnsandMr.Slackalsomaintainactiveprivatepractices.FortheperiodOctober2009toSeptember2010,thecaseloadsofbothMr.BurnsandMr.Slackfarexceededtheguidelinesforpublicdefendercaseloads.Assumingastandardworkschedule,andwithout

148See2010U.S.CensusestimatesforIronCounty,availableathttp://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/49/49021.html(lastvisitedJune7,2011).

149See2010U.S.CensusdataforCedarCity(pop.28,857),availableforsearchanddownloadathttp://quickfacts.census.gov/cgi-bin/qfd/demolink?49(lastvisitedJune4,2011).

150Seehttp://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/povertyrates/PovListpct.asp?st=UT&view=

Percent&longname=Utah(lastvisitedMay29,2011)(printoutonfilewiththeACLUofUtah).151UtahAdministrativeOfficeoftheCourts,FiscalYear2010UtahCourtsCaseload,FirstDistrictCourtforIronCounty(July1,2009-June30,2010),availableathttp://www.utcourts.gov/stats/files/2010FY/district/5-Iron.pdf(lastvisitedMay29,2011).

152UtahAdministrativeOfficeoftheCourts,FiscalYear2010UtahCourtsCaseload,IronCountyJusticeCourt(July1,2009-June30,2010),availableathttp://www.utcourts.gov/stats/files/2010FY/justice/5-Iron.pdf(lastvisitedMay29,2011).

153See2010AdoptedBudgetforIronCounty(Iron2010Budget)at5,availableforsearchanddownloadathttp://www.sao.state.ut.us/lgReports.html#(lastvisitedJune27,2011);seealsoU.S.CensusBureau,State&CountyQuickFactsIronCounty,Utah(Nov.4,2010),availableathttp://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/49/49021.html(lastvisitedJune27,2011).In2010,IronCountysestimatedpopulationwas46,163,whichdividedintothetotalpublicdefensebudgetof$204,000equals$4.42percapita.Itappearsfromthebudgetand

otherpubliclyavailablematerialsthatIronCountycontributesanotherapproximately$26,118totheIndigentCapitalDefenseFund.SeeIron2010AdoptedBudget,supra,at5.


155SeeAgreementswithJackBurnsandJefferySlack,producedbyIronCountyinresponsetoACLUofUtahGRAMARequestdatedMay13,2008(IronAttorneyAgreements),at2-3(both)(onfilewithACLUofUtah).Appealsarecontractedseparatelyataflatfeeof$750perappeal,regardlessofeachappealscomplexity.Seeid.at6(both).


41/100


36

factoringinanytimespentoncivilormiscellaneousmatters,thereportedcaseloadsofMessrs.BurnsandSlackwouldleavethemwithonlyabout13.1

hoursand12.6hours,respectively,tohandleeachfelonyorfelonyequivalent156caseontheirdockets.157Andiftheirmiscellaneouscasesarefactoredinandtotaltrackedcaseloadsareconsidered,thosenumbersdroptoonly9.3hours(Mr.Burns)or6.7hours(Mr.Slack)percase.

Athirdattorney,WilliamLeigh,handlesalljuvenilecourtcasesatacontractamountof$45,000annually.158Mr.LeighisalsothecontractpublicdefenderinneighboringKaneCounty(infraatpp.43-48),withacontractamountof$50,000annually,andalsomaintainsanactiveprivatepractice.

Accordingto2010budgetfigures,IronCountybudgetedalmostnoadditional fundsa mere $19,000above and beyond these contract

amounts(totaling$185,000)fornon-capitalpublicdefenseservices.159

Bycontrast,theIronCountyAttorneysOfficestaffcurrentlyincludesfiveattorneysandhada2010budgetallocationof$884,600. 160Thatisoverfourtimestheamountbudgetedfornon-capitalpublicdefenseservicesthatsameyear. Add to that the near unlimited access enjoyedby the CountyAttorneys office to police officers and victim advocates (who often areallowed to testify as experts) and to the state crime lab, and one canreasonablyestimatethattheresourcesallocatedtotheCountyAttorneyarelikelyclosertofivetimestheamountofthepublicdefensebudget.

156Supranote21.

157Seefulldiscussioninfraatpp.41-42.

158

SeeAgreementwithWilliamLeigh,producedbyIronCountyinresponsetoACLUofUtahGRAMARequestdatedMay13,2008(LeighAgreement),at2-3(onfilewithACLUofUtah).

159SeeIron2010Budget,supranote153,at5.

160Id.at12.TheCountyAttorneysbudgetforfiscalyear2010included,amongotherthings,$530,000foremployeesalaries,$275,000foremployeebenefits,and$8,000fortravelandtraining.


42/100


37

When asked, Iron County could not provide any documentation

demonstratingthatit has inplaceanypoliciesorprocedurestoguaranteethator even tomonitorwhetherindividual defendants in Iron Countyreceive quality defense services.161 There are apparently no systems inplace to screen for conflicts of interest, to track caseloads, or to ensureconsistentandcompetentrepresentation. 162

To further compound this lack of oversight, the Iron CountyCommissionprimarilyreliesontheadviceandinputoftheCountyAttorneywhenawardingand renewing thepublicdefendercontracts. Thisviolatesthe first of the ABAs Ten Principles, i.e., full independence of publicdefendersfromprosecutorialorpoliticalinfluenceorcontrol. 163

161SeeJune4,2008,Resp.fromIronCountytoACLUofUtahGRAMArequestdatedMay13,2008(2008IronResp.),at1(onfilewiththeACLUofUtah).

162Id.

163SeeABATenPrinciples,supranote19,at1.

$221,023 $206,347 $204,000 $203,235 $204,527

$876,721 $840,653 $884,600 $836,000 $853,751


IronCounty



43/100


38

DETAILEDPUBLICRECORDSINFORMATION:IRONCOUNTY

STANDARDSANDOVERSIGHT IronCountycontractswiththreeprivateattorneystoprovidepublic

defense services: Jack Burns handles half of the countys non-juvenile public defense cases (at $70,000 annually); Jeffery Slackhandles theother half of the countys non-juvenile public defensecases (also at $70,000 annually); and William Leigh handles thecountysjuvenilepublicdefensecases(at$45,000annually).164

Appealsarehandledseparatelyatacontractualsetfeeof$750percase,regardlessofthecasescomplexity.165

IronCountystatedthatitdoesnothavewrittenpoliciesfor 166:

o Supervisingtheongoingprovisionofpublicdefenseservices;o Requiringpublicdefenderstoparticipateincontinuinglegal

education;oro Monitoringthecaseloadsofpublicdefenders.

Iron County stated that it does not have any written criteria or

guidelinesfor167:o Selectingcounseltorepresentindigentdefendants;o Ensuringthatpublicdefendersmeetminimumqualifications

orperformancestandards;oro Analyzing the adequacy of compensation for public

defenders.

164SeeIronAttorneyAgreements,supranote155,at2-3(both);LeighAgreement,supranote158,at2-3.

165SeeIronAttorneyAgreements,supranote155,at6(both);LeighAgreement,supranote158,at6.WeareadvisedthatappealsarefrequentlyhandledbyRandallC.Allen,whoinadditiontohandlingappealsinIronCountyhaspublicdefendercontractsinBeaverCounty,

GarfieldCounty,KaneCounty,ParowanCity,andCedarCity.SeeJuly16,2008,Resp.byKaneCountytoACLUofUtahGRAMARequestdatedMay13,2008,at28(onfilewithACLUofUtah).Mr.AllenalsomaintainsaprivatepracticeandteachesasanassistantprofessorofpoliticalscienceatSouthernUtahUniversity.See,e.g.,ResumeofRandallC.Allen,availableathttp://www.suu.edu/faculty/AllenR/Vita.pdf(lastvisitedJuly2,2011).

166See2008IronResp.,supranote161,at1.

167Seeid.


44/100


39

CONFLICTSOFINTEREST

Untilrecently,inIronCounty,publicdefenderswererequiredtopayfor conflict counsel out of their base contract. That contractualprovisionhasnowbeeneliminated.

Iron County does not have any written policy or procedure forscreeningfororidentifyingconflictsofinterest. 168

FUNDINGANDRESOURCES

Iron Countyspends approximately$4.42percapitaonnon-capitalpublic defense,169which is 37 percent of the national average of$11.86percapita.170

Accordingto 2010budgetfigures, Iron Countybudgeted$204,000

fornon-capitalpublicdefenderservices.Thatincludes$185,000incontractpaymentstoMessrs.Burns,Slack,andLeigh,$10,000thatisdescribedasotherlegalservices,andanundesignated$9,000thatislumpedinwiththecontractsunderlegalservices.171AccordingtotheOfficeoftheUtahStateAuditor,thetotalexpenditurefortheIron County non-capital public defense system in 2009 wasapproximately$206,000(outofabudgeted$221,023).172

By contrast, the total expenditure for the Iron County Attorneys

Office in 2009 was approximately $840,653 (out of a budgeted

$876,721)173over four times the allocation for public

Failing Gideon

Documents

Transcript of Failing Gideon