The Case for the Last Line of Defense
State Public Defenders hold the most thankless job in law, but it should be the most celebrated. Left unchecked, the executive branch of government would become abusive. Without State Public Defenders, the Constitutional rights of a vast majority of criminal defendants could only be protected by a court that was somehow notified of the breach or the good-hearted prosecutor that refused to introduce evidence that was illegally obtained. The assertion of a particular right would essentially be non-existent, and the Bill of Rights would be slowly eroded into a stilted and formalized set of rules that could be easily circumvented by law enforcement. Actually, it is already happening. Little is really known about this select group of lawyers, except the perception portrayed by the media: over-worked, underpaid, sometimes incompetent, and most of all, always underappreciated.
The same criminal defendant will receive the same quality legal competency from both a private attorney and a State Public Defender. The primary difference is in the investigative and preparatory time devoted to a particular case because of the overwhelming caseload a public defender must carry. The other difference is if a defendant has money he gets to hire the lawyer of his choice, rather than being assigned a public defender. An average public defender has over 750 open cases at any one time; the American Bar Association recommends no more than 400 open cases. At some point, though, the Constitutional question of effectiveness of counsel must be made, not because of the quality of the individual lawyer but by the system in which he or she must work. The right to stand up against the government, especially when the government is attempting to strip a person of his liberty, is foundational to our nation and must be protected. Time for each individual defendant is shorter and shorter, and the time to argue and write about important Constitutional questions to the court is more and more elusive. Thus, everyone is being hurt because the rights-based jurisprudence (theory of law) is being lost.
The reason for the overwhelming caseload is the shortage of funding. It is easy to say, and even easier to vote for, that child molesters should go without trials or that drug dealers should not have a right to privacy. When their rights are violated in order to obtain a conviction, your rights are equally violated. As I have described in earlier articles, our liberties have been slowly constrained for the purposes of judicial and law enforcement expediency and administerability. This process will continue so long as money is unavailable to effectively fight back. Budget cuts to the third branch of government will eventually require that certain crimes not be crimes any more, such as drug offenses, driving without insurance, or first-time DUI offenses, just to lighten the load. Rather than achieving more order, Minnesota will actually become more chaotic.
The nefarious combination of lack of funding and overwhelming caseload leads criminal defendants to allege that their public defender is incompetent and ineffective. Public defenders are virtually never incompetent, but they can become ineffective given the size of their workload. The last line of Constitutional defense is slowly being eviscerated as the budget cuts grow deeper. This should be an issue both conservatives and liberals could agree on. Conservatives are inherently distrustful of an invasive government and liberals generally seek to have individual freedoms fully protected. Therefore, supporting more public defenders helps keep the government off your back and protects the liberties we were granted at the founding of our country. When a public defender has time to focus on each case, it will become highly apparent exactly why he or she should be celebrated.
