NCJ Number
112745
Journal
Criminal Justice Volume: 3 Issue: 2 Dated: (Summer 1988) Pages: 15-17,45-47
Date Published
1988
Length
6 pages
Annotation
Attorneys representing indigent clients in criminal cases are faced with a plethora of forms, marginal pay, and a cap on how much can be billed.
Abstract
Attorneys' overhead costs continue to rise, while fee schedules have been ignored or cut. In some jurisdictions, fees have not been changed in 10 years. Most attorneys must sign up with either the court or an independent agency that controls the budget of the appointed-counsel system. Malpractice rates continue to rise, placing the attorney in jeopardy with appointing agencies who may require insurance as a condition of appointment. In addition, the spectre of allegations of counsel ineffectiveness looms larger when trial counsel must cut corners for economic reasons. Most fees for appointed counsel are set by State statute or by legislative delegation of authority to a third party. While most statutes require the payment of reasonable fees, these fees pale in comparison to those charged by colleagues in civil matters and place appointed defense at a distinct disadvantage. Litigation regarding fee schedules and awards has taken two approaches. While in some cases single-case litigation has had a decided effect on a State's fee schedule, most cases have been unsuccessful, with courts emphasizing pro bono publico. Impact litigation, focusing on the system as a whole, has been structured to promote higher fees and a more organized public defender system. 1 table.