Law Students: Save the date!  On Wednesday, April 14^th at 3:00pm EDT, NALP and the National Legal Aid & Defender Association (NLADA) are presenting “Top Ten Tips for a Successful Summer Internship in a Public Interest Office…and What to Avoid.”  This free webinar will help law students make the most of their summer experiences in civil legal services organizations and public defenders’ offices by offering concrete tips from both public interest attorneys with extensive experience in supervising law students and law school public interest advisors who counsel students on maximizing professional development opportunities.  The webinar will be led by Jennifer Thomas, Director of Legal Recruiting for the D.C. Public Defender Service, and Phyllis Holmen, Executive Director of the Georgia Legal Services Program.   

The webinar will be offered live on April 14th and archived for later viewing.  All students and law school career professionals who are interested in participating on April 14th should e-mail Kevin Mills, Director of Membership at NLADA at membership@nlada.org, and provide your full name, e-mail address, and a phone number.  Please type “Student Webinar” in the email’s subject line.

The Public Interest News Bulletin took a rare vacation last week, but has returned with coverage of stories from the past two weeks affecting public interest lawyers and law students.

• 4.1.10 – Atlanta Journal-Constitution – rural Georgians find it difficult to access legal services because so few lawyers practice outside of the state’s metropolitan areas.  Of 28,200 lawyers practicing in the state, almost 70% are in the greater Atlanta area.  There are 35 counties with no more than four lawyers.  The Georgia Legal Services Program, which aims to serve low-income clients outside of Atlanta, is seeing demand for its services rise, but its funding streams have diminished in the recession.  (IOLTA funding to GLSP was cut in half between 2009 and 2010 – from $2.8 million to $1.4 million.)  To further compound the problem of accessing legal services in rural areas, moderate-income Georgians who do not qualify for free legal services often end up representing themselves because they find it too expensive to retain counsel.  Link to article.

• 3.31.10 – Blog of the Legal Times – “In a case [Robertson v. United States ex rel Watson] being closely watched by advocates for domestic abuse victims, several Supreme Court justices on Wednesday expressed serious discomfort with a District of Columbia law that lets the victims themselves bring criminal prosecutions to enforce restraining orders.”  The underlying question in Robertson is whether a private individual who initiates a criminal contempt proceeding is acting as a state agent in doing so.  While many advocates for DV victims support allowing individuals to pursue such actions (because they can be initiated by battered women who seek to enforce restraining orders), “at least four justices wondered aloud about the protections afforded to criminal defendants facing such charges” because it is tantamount to giving law enforcement authority to private citizens.  Link to blog post. 

• 3.29.10 – National Law Journal (Opinion Piece) – recent lawsuits challenging resource deficiencies in state indigent defense programs, as well as a well-intentioned Department of Justice initiative to shore up public defense infrastructures nationwide, show that there is a problem.  But the federal government should not “throw more money at the states; instead, it needs to get out of this business altogether….  The problem is entirely of the state’s own making and within its control. State lawmakers determine what will be a crime in the first place and the attached punishment, while state agents choose which individuals will be propelled through the criminal justice system.”  And when states exercise their power to create and enforce criminal laws, they must also ensure that their justice systems provide adequate resources for the accused to protect their rights.  “[D]elinquent jurisdictions must be held responsible for their decisions, not absolved from their constitutional debts. The states owe indigent defendants competent legal representation. It’s time to pay up.”  Link to piece.

• 3.29.10 – New York RealEstateRama Website – New York City “Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg…launched a new NYC Service initiative to provide free legal support for New Yorkers at risk of losing their homes to foreclosure.  The program will increase the availability and effectiveness of free legal representation for those facing foreclosure by training and dispatching 300 volunteer attorneys to expand legal services provided by non-profit organizations.”  The volunteers’ work will be supported by ProBono.net, the Empire Justice Center, Legal Services NYC, the Legal Aid Society, and the City Bar Justice Center.  Link to article.

• 3.29.10 – The Recorder (California) – San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi, during a press conference on 3/25, called for the city to establish a crime lab that works independently of law enforcement “in the wake of an evidence tampering scandal at the police department’s crime lab.”  Also, in calling for additional dismissals of cases [the prosecutor’s office has already dismissed over 350 drug cases] that could have been tainted as a result of the scandal, Adachi argued that the prosecutor has been slow to turn over information related to the scandal.  The District Attorney’s office opposes a sweeping round of case dismissals and contends that it is not responding slowly to requests for information.  Link to article.      

• 3.26.10 – Idaho Mountain Express – a report released in January by the National Legal Aid & Defender Association “states that Idaho has ‘sewn a patchwork quilt’ of underfunded and overworked public defender systems that are not constitutionally adequate.”   The report reviewed varying public defense models used in several counties.  The Idaho Criminal Justice Commisssion, which had been studying the indigent defense infrastructure in the state even before the report’s release, is now reviewing the report and is developing “a model public defender system for use by counties, public defender conduct standards, guidelines for qualifications for appointment of public defenders…and training programs for judges and lawyers.”  Link to article.

• 3.26.10 – Charlotte Observer (North Carolina) – an assistant public defender in Mecklenburg County is “taking steps to limit court participation by the neighborhood advocacy group called CharMeck Court Watch.”  The group’s goal is to push for “tougher penalties for some defendants with histories of arrests or convictions for felonies.”  The assistant public defender opposes the group’s practice of handing up written materials to prosecutors during court proceedings, and also worries that members wearing Court Watch t-shirts in the courtroom may have a prejudicial effect on proceedings.   (As to the practice wearing t-shirts, an ACLU attorney suggests that there is no problem with this as long as Court Watch members do not interfere with proceedings.)  Link to article.

• 3.25.10 – Blog of the Legal Times – the District of Columbia is to become a mandatory IOLTA jurisdiction.  See coverage, including a link to the original BLT post, in the PSLawNet Blog .

• 3.25.10 – Atlanta Journal-Constitution – “The Georgia Supreme Court on Thursday narrowly rejected a bid to bar prosecutors from seeking the death penalty against a defendant who has sat in jail for more than three years awaiting trial because there has been no money for his defense.  The 4-3 ruling said the state did not violate Jamie Ryan Weis’ right to a speedy trial and placed some of the blame on the defendant and his attorneys.”  Link to article.  [Ed. Note – Georgia’s underfunded public defense system has recevied a good deal of coverage lately.  The Georgia Supreme Court heard arguments in a case very similar to this one earlier this month, according to another Atlanta Journal-Constitution article.  And, the Associated Press recently covered the sad financial state of the system.]

• 3.24.10 – Buffalo Law Joural (New York) (Running an Associated Press story) –  “An attorney for the New York Civil Liberties Union told the state’s top court Tuesday that poor defendants often spend much more time locked up because the state system of public defenders routinely fails.   The NYCLU claims that the lack of effective legal help violates state and federal constitutional guarantees to counsel. The group faulted all three methods used among the state’s 62 counties: full-time public defenders, a list of private lawyers who take cases and legal-aid societies.”  The NYCLU is fighting the keep the lawsuit alive.  It was dismissed by a lower court over concerns that the judiciary may intrude upon legislative functions if it fashions a means to change the indigent defense system.  Link to story.

• 3.23.10 – OMB Watch Website (Commentary Piece) – “For the past 14 years, the Legal Services Corporation (LSC), which funds legal services for the poor, has been forced by Congress to place severe restrictions on legal aid programs that receive LSC funds….  At this critical time in our nation, legislative support for the Civil Access to Justice Act of 2009 is crucial….  The…act would expand access to justice to low-income populations by lifting … restrictions and helping to ensure that federally funded legal services providers are able to assist their clients in the most effective way possible.”  [Ed. Note: the piece provides a useful history of attempts, through litigation, to roll back the operating restrictions placed on LSC grantees in the late 1990s.]  Link to piece.

• 3.22.10 – Pittsburgh Tribune-Review – “Federal judges have been giving black and Hispanic males longer sentences as compared to white males since a 2005 Supreme Court decision converted federal sentencing guidelines from mandates to suggestions, a recently released U.S. Sentencing Commission report says.  Local criminal defense attorneys and law professors said they’re skeptical about the study’s results and don’t want to see a return to mandatory guidelines.”  The 2005 Supreme Court decision held that the mandatory sentencing guidelines in place at the time must instead be read by judges as recommendations.  Since then, according to the USSC report, disparities in sentences for minority defendants compared to whites have returned, whereas they were actually abating at the time of the Supreme Court decision.  Critics of the report note that some data which was not factored into its analysis may have skewed the disparity figures.  The “data do not meausure the amount of violence in the defendant’s criminal past, or crimes included in the pre-sentencing report that aren’t used to calculate teh defendant’s criminal history score.”  Link to article.

• 3.22.10 – Connecticut Law Tribune – as legal services programs in Connecticut have fallen victim to budget woes, the state’s chapter of the American College of Trial Lawyers put on a free one-day, litigation skills training for legal services lawyers.  Link to article.

• 3.20.10 – Lansing State Journal (Michigan) (Running an Associated Press Story) – Michigan “has one of the nation’s stingiest and most fragmented systems for representing the 80 percent of defendants who can’t afford a lawyer, a wide range of critics say.”  A National Legal Aid & Defender Association report noted that the state’s annual per capita spending on indigent defense, $7.35, ranks it among the lowest of the 50 states.  Some also point to the fact that having an inadequate public defense system could ultimately cost the state money in having to adjudicate ineffective-asssitance-of-counsel appeals and in housing a larger number of inmates.  There are reform efforts being pushed in both the legislative and judicial arenas.  “The state House Judiciary Committee is drafting a bipartisan proposal to overhaul Michigan’s 153-year-old indigent defense system.”  And, next month the state supreme court will hear arguments in a class action suit, initiated by the ACLU, challenging the system as being inadequate to meet constitutional guarantees.  Link to article.  [Ed Note: a previous PSLawNet Blog post on the Michigan indigent defense crisis links to additional media coverage.]

• 3.20.10 – Marin Independent Journal (California) – in a circumstance emblematic of difficult decisions confronting cash-strapped counties throughout the U.S., Marin Mediations Services, a Marin County program that has “resolved thousands of disputes…over the past three decades” may not survive as the government wrestles with a $20 million budget shortfall.  The program will not go away without a fight from its director, who argues that mediation services save money by settling legal disputes without protracted litigation.”  If the program is cut, the county may ask the district attorney’s office to handle more mediation matters.  Link to article.

• 3.19.10 – New York Times – the Santa Clara County (California) district attorney’s recently imposed policy of using peremptory challenges to effectively ban a particular judge from sitting in most criminal matters has caused debate in the legal community and led to complications in courthouse administration.  District Attorney Dolores Carr contends that Judge Andrea Bryan is not giving her office a “fair shake.”  Since Bryan threw out a sexual abuse conviction because of what she saw as “outrageous” misconduct on the part of a prosecutor at trial, Carr’s office has instituted the peremptory challange policy.  Such challenges are permitted by law  but the sheer volume and consistency of the challenges is a marked departure from custom.  Link to article.  [Ed. Note: previous coverage available via stories from the San Jose Mercury News published on  2.8.10 and 1.26.10.] 

• 3.19.10 – Legal Services Corporation Press Release – the Senate confirmed six of President Obama’s nominees to serve on the board of the Legal Services Corporation.  “The six nominees were Sharon L. Browne, Robert J. Grey, Jr., Charles N.W. Keckler, John G. Levi, Victor B. Maddox and Martha L. Minow. President Obama announced their nominations last year and the nominations were approved by the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, led by Chairman Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Ranking Member Michael B. Enzi (R-Wyo.).”  Link to press release.  [Ed. Note – one nomination, that of Sharon L. Browne, had caused some controversy in the public interest community as both the ABA and a sizeable consortium of public interest advocates opposed her joining the LSC board.  The PSLawNet Blog covered this controversy in 3/11 post.]

• 3.18.10 – Casper Journal (Wyoming) – on March 11 Wyoming’s governor signed into law a bill that begins to build the infrastructure for a statewide civil legal services sytem.  “In 2009, Wyoming and Idaho were the only two states in the nation that didn’t have a specific appropriation to directly support general, civil legal aid for low income individuals. The law that goes into effect on July 1 will put Wyoming in line with the rest of the nation by providing legal services statewide for the tens of thousands of Wyoming people who can’t afford the legal services they need.”  The legal services program will be funded via a $10 court case filing fee, which will be collected beginning in July.  By November, a plan to put the accumulated funds into action should be submitted to the Wyoming legislature.  Link to article.

Law Students: Save the date!  On Wednesday, April 14^th at 3:00pm EDT, NALP and the National Legal Aid & Defender Association (NLADA) are presenting “Top Ten Tips for a Successful Summer Internship in a Public Interest Office…and What to Avoid.”  This free webinar will help law students make the most of their summer experiences in civil legal services organizations and public defenders’ offices by offering concrete tips from both public interest attorneys with extensive experience in supervising law students and law school public interest advisors who counsel students on maximizing professional development opportunities.  The webinar will be led by Jennifer Thomas, Director of Legal Recruiting for the D.C. Public Defender Service, and Phyllis Holmen, Executive Director of the Georgia Legal Services Program.   

The webinar will be offered live on April 14th and archived for later viewing.  All students and law school career professionals who are interested in participating on April 14th should e-mail Kevin Mills, Director of Membership at NLADA at membership@nlada.org, and provide your full name, e-mail address, and a phone number.  Please type “Student Webinar” in the email’s subject line.

When the terms “public interest lawyer” and “jeopardy” are used in the same sentence, it almost always refers to student debt.  And we’re willing to bet one month’s Stafford repayment that “public interest lawyer” has never appeared in the same sentence as “Cliff Clavin.”  (That joke will separate our Gen X from our Gen Y readers.)  Tonight, it all changes.

According to the Beyond Bread Blog, which is run by DC-based nonprofit Bread for the City, their legal clinic fellow Stacy Braverman has appeared on an episode of Jeopardy! that will air tonight.  Tune in to find out how she does.  We’re hoping that there were question categories on LRAP and Pro Bono.

Good luck, Stacy!

[Tip of cap from PSLawNet Blog to NALP/Street Law Legal Diversity Pipeline Program Fellow Millie Bond.]

If you don’t have a job with benefits lined up after graduation, you may be worried about your health insurance status, particularly if you have insurance through your school (or another situation that requires you to be a full-time student). Many schools are extending their insurance benefits for six months to a year after graduation to help tide students over while they find a job – you should check with your student health office. Another option is purchase health insurance through the ABA Law Student Division (which does have a $25 annual membership fee), which offers an extension of that coverage for a year past your law school graduation date. If you’re graduating this May, be aware that the deadline for enrollment to ensure continuous coverage is May 1, 2010.

Update: In order to extend coverage under the ABA student policy, you must attend 31 days of classes after you purchase the insurance – so if you’re planning on doing this make sure you will have at least a month of  classes left before finals! The relevant language from the policy, under “Eligibility,” is this: “Students must actively attend classes for at least the first 31 days after the date for which coverage is purchased.”

For our final poll of the week (if you missed Part 1 or Part 2, go back to them now!), we’d like to know how often you use our primary site and service, PSLawNet. Just as a reminder, if you are a student or alumni of one of our subscriber schools, you are entitled to free use of the site, and other law students or lawyers can email us to inquire about an individual subscription.

[polldaddy poll=2923751]

• 3/18/10 – State Bar of Wisconsin Website – “In a move supported by the State Bar of Wisconsin, the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee has approved releasing an additional $1.4 million to support prosecutors around the state in an effort to ease the increased workload caused by a new law increasing penalties for driving while intoxicated.  However, the committee on March 16 also passed on three opportunities to allocate even more support to already-strained district attorney offices in Wisconsin.”  Link to article.

• 3/18/10 – Columbia Missourian (Op-ed) – as a litany of studies and reports have demonstrated, the indigent defense network in Missouri is laboring under the weight of too many cases with too few resources.  The 6th Amendment guarantee of a right to counsel that was recognized in Gideon v. Wainwright could be in jeopardy.  “At some point, justice underfunded is justice denied.”  In the current legislative climate, the problem will not likely be solved with a windfall of needed funding, though.  So, it may be necessary to take administrative steps that increase public defenders’ political clout and broaden their base of political support, giving them a stronger voice when they seek additional resources for their programs.  Link to op-ed.

• 3/18/10 – San Francisco Chronicle – “A Senate committee approved the nominations of Sharon Browne and two other Republicans to the board of Legal Services Corp. last week on a voice vote with no dissent.  Ms. Browne’s nomination had been opposed by several civil rights and public interest organizations, which argued that some of her work and the work of her employer, the Pacific Legal Foundation, essentially undermined the mission of the legal services community.  However, “In written answers to questions from Democrats on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, Browne said she supports federal legal aid to the poor. She disavowed some of her foundation’s positions, including a lawsuit that unsuccessfully challenged one of the major sources of legal aid funding.”  Link to article.  [Ed. Note: the PSLawNet Blog has additional coverage of  the Senate committee vote here.]

• 3/18/10 – Press Release – “The New York Bar Foundation announced today that it has recently awarded 57 grants totaling $337,050 to fund charitable and educational law-related projects. The grants have been awarded to legal services agencies, bar associations and other nonprofit organizations to fund projects throughout New York State. Several grants will support programs that provide access to justice to those who suffer from domestic violence, to low-income or poor immigrants, to the elderly who are neglected or abused, and to incarcerated women. Portions of grant funding will help those seeking assistance with legal guardianships for disabled children, bankruptcy, foreclosures, debt collection, and consumer debt.”  Link to press release.

• 3/18/10 – Baltimore Sun “Maryland Politics” Blog – Maryland’s House of Delegates passed a measure that would increase funding for financially beleaguered legal services programs through an increase in court filing fees.  However, the language in the House’s bill differs from a measure recently approved by the Senate, and the two must be reconciled before April 12th, when the legislative session ends.  Link to article.  [Ed. Note: earlier this week a Washington Post editorial urged Maryland lawmakers to pass legislation that would boost funding for legal services providers throughout the state.  Shoring up funding for legal services is essential, the editorial argued, because the IOLTA funding mechanism in the state has been all but crippled during the recession; IOLTA yields fell from $6.7 million just 18 months ago to $2 million presently.  Link to editorial.]

• 3/18/10 – New York Law Journal – “The New York City Bar yesterday retracted a finding from a survey suggesting that deferred associates were not satisfied with the lawyers with whom they worked at public interest groups. The city bar said it misinterpreted data it collected earlier this year.”  The City Bar attributed the mistake in interpreting the initial finding to a confusing presentation of the survey data.  A revised version of the survey report is now available.  In contrast to the initial report, the revised report shows that “deferred associates ‘were largely happy with their placements,’ a stark difference from the previous report, which suggested a “culture gap” had emerged between the law firm-bound lawyers and their public interest colleagues.”  Link to article.  Link to revised report.  

• 3/16/10 – Washington Post (Letter to the Editor) – Scott Wallace, now a foundation chair and formerly the director of defender services for the Nat’l Legal Aid & Defender Association (NLADA) writes in praise of a recent Washington Post editorial, which itself was supportive of Attorney General Holder’s initiative to shore up indigent defense services throughout the country.  Wallace argues that the editorial did not go far enough, though, and that DOJ should pressure states to make sure that their public defense infrastructures do in fact meet constitutional obligations.  Link to letter. 

• 3/16/10 – National Law Journal –  “The Los Angeles County, Calif., Superior Court will lay off 329 employees and close 17 courtrooms in response to cuts tied to California’s continuing budget crisis, administrators announced on Tuesday.”  There is some controversy surrounding the move; the Judicial Council of California, “which oversees court funding” throughout the state, expressed skepticism that this move by local court officials was necessary.  However, L.A. Superior Court Presiding Judge Tim McCoy, Jr. hinted that even more layoffs could be necessary to stem a budget deficit that could run to $140 million in the next four years.   Link to article.

• 3/15/10 – New York Times – as U.S. military veterans return from combat deployments, a significant percentage is at risk of suffering from mental health problems.  Civilian courts across the country take veterans’ service and potential readjustment issues into account when they run into trouble with the law.  “Judges have recognized that many of those returning from war are carrying a heavy burden of damage that might not be physically visible.”  Several states have been seeing more veterans in courts, and in order to ensure that they receive the treatment they are due have been establishing special courts, akin to drug courts, that allow the judicial system to take into account the unique circumstances that affect veterans’ behavior.  Link to article.

• 3/15/10 – The Daily Tell – “two $1 million grants to the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University will establish the Diane Halle Center for Family Justice and the NextCare Urgent Care Family Violence Legal Clinic to address domestic law issues….  Together, these two new organizations will engage law students [on issues related to] child abuse, spousal abuse, family law, juvenile law, protective orders and more. It is hoped that the programs will not only benefit victims but also educate future generations of lawyers about the importance of serving family clients.”  Link to article.

• 3/15/10 – New York Times – “A class-action suit to be argued next week in New York’s highest court has become a test of a national strategy by civil liberties groups to challenge what they say are failed public defender programs in many states.  Because an estimated 80 percent of felony defendants in large states are too poor to hire their own lawyers, and because the case is being watched around the nation, the case has the potential to alter the shape of the criminal justice system.”  In the suit, the New York Civil Liberties Union is challenging the constitutionality of the statewide indigent defense infrastructure in the Empire State.  The Court of Appeals will decide whether the suit can go forward in a lower trial court.  The state has argued that the judiciary should not be involved in re-fashioning the indigent defense system through a court decision because it is the responsibility of the other two branches of government.  Link to article.

• 3/15/10 – Cincinnati Enquirer – The Legal Aid Society of Greater Cincinnati has a launched the “Covering Kids and Families” campaign, which “aims to enroll 1,800 eligible children and teens in nine Southwest Ohio counties, including Butler, Clermont, Hamilton and Warren counties, in Medicaid. There are an estimated 18,000 uninsured children and teens in the nine-county area.”  Campaign efforts will concentrate on outreach to underserved communities.  The initiative coincides with a similar undertaking by the state government to insure children who are eligible for health coverage but are not enrolled.  Link to article.

• 3.14.10 – Minneapolis Star Tribune – Galen Robinson, an attorney with Mid-Minnesota Legal Assistance, is used to helping low-income clients with matters that may not garner much media attention.  Now, though, the spotlight has found Robinson as he and team of colleagues wage a legal battle against Governor Tim Pawlenty over his budget-cutting move that would defund a nutrition program used by low-income Minnesotans.  Link to article. 

• 3/12/10 – Los Angeles Times – a medical-legal partnership serving low-income residents in the Los Angeles area is one of 10 such programs in California and 76 partnerships nationwide.  Often, poor people will seek medical attention for health problems but will not realize that they also have underlying legal problems or that they may be able to use the justice system to improve their living conditions – and their health – by addressing poor housing conditions, accessing public benefits, and in other ways.  Medical-legal partnerships allow doctors and lawyers to take more broad-based approaches to improving their patients’/clients’ lives.  Link to article.

As part of our continued efforts to make this blog as useful to our audience as possible, here’s a second poll (if you missed our first on Monday, it’s not too late! Go back to it and make sure you’re counted). If you have ideas or suggestions for things to include on the blog, please leave them in comments below!

[polldaddy poll=2895023]

This week we’ll be including a few polls among our usual posts of news summaries, resources, interviews, and more. We’d like to get to know a little more about our audience and how we can serve you better. So to kick things off:

[polldaddy poll=2894923]

• 3.11.10 – National Law Journal – budget cuts, hearing delays and staff constrictions in the Massachusetts court system are emblematic of serious fiscal problems confronting state judiciaries throughout the country, including: New York, where the governor’s recommendation to cut $130 million from the judiciary’s budget has drawn opposition from the state’s top judge; a handful of Midwestern states, like Michigan and Illinois, which are also facing budget cuts; and California, where a range of austerity measures is in place in courthouses up and down the state.  Link to article.

• 3.11.10 – Associated Press – “Georgia’s public defender system is still trying to recover its financial footing five years after a courthouse gunman racked up a $3 million taxpayer-funded defense tab on the way to his conviction.   The state’s ailing system to defend the poor has struggled almost since its start in 2005, hamstrung not just by the costly Brian Nichols case but also because of the lukewarm support from legislators and a dismal economy.”  The statewide system was created in 2005 to help counties that were struggling to support indigent defense programs on their own.  Since its inception, though, it has experienced financial strains and endured criticism (and legal challenges) concerning its administration.  Death penalty cases can be especially problematic because they are so costly and time-consuming.  Link to article.  [Ed. Note: below, see Atlanta Journal-Constitution coverage of a recent Georgia Supreme Court argument concerning funding for an indigent defendant charged with a capital crime.]

• 3.11.10 – National Law Journal – “Despite opposition from the American Bar Association and a coalition of more than 70 civil rights, fair housing, consumer and other legal groups, a Senate committee on Wednesday approved the nomination of Sharon Browne of the Pacific Legal Foundation to the board of directors of the Legal Services Corp.”  Browne works with the Pacific Legal Foundation, a nonprofit law office that supports conservative/libertarian causes.  According to critics, both the Foundation and Browne have in the past supported causes and advocacy that were in opposition to the mission of LSC.  Link to article. [Ed Note: the PSLawNet Blog covered both the initial opposition to Ms. Browne’s nomination and the Senate HELP Committee’s approval of her nomination in a post yesterday, including links to past coverage and a 3.10.10 LSC press release. ]

• 3.10.10 – Baltimore Sun (“Second Opinion” Online Editorial Page) – “At a time when record numbers of Marylanders are struggling with foreclosure, eviction or loss of health and unemployment benefits, non-profit legal aid groups that help people pursue their rights in court are increasingly unable to do their job.”  IOLTA funding has fallen from $6.7 million in 2008 to a current $2 million.  This is one of the main reasons that the Maryland Legal Services Corporation, a funder of legal services statewide, “has seen its own funding drop 70 percent over the last 18 months.”  A proposal in the state General Assembly seeks to replenish legal services coffers by increasing a range of court filing fees, resulting in an anticipated $9 million in revenue.  Lawmakers should promote access to justice for the state’s poor by supporting this proposal.   Link to post.  [Ed. Note – the 3/11/10 edition of the Baltimore Sun contains in article on the state legislature’s consideration of these filing-fee increase proposals in order to shore up the legal and social services network.  Chief Judge Robert M. Bell supports measures to ramp up legal aid funding, but also cautioned about going too far with court filing fee hikes, noting that these efforts to improve access to justice for poor clients – through legal aid lawyers – can’t also be allowed to deny access to the courts to others on account of steep fees.  Link to article. ]

• 3.10.10 – New York Times (Editorial) – Attorney General Holder was wise to tap Laurence Tribe as the head of a Department of Justice initiative to “look at ways indigent legal services can be improved, including by creating incentives for states to make better use of pro bono legal assistance, and help the growing number of people who represent themselves navigate the courts.”  Link to editorial.  [Ed. Note: this piece, while focusing mainly on the indigent criminal defense arena, also references the difficulties confronting civil legal services programs, implying that perhaps the DOJ initiative will focus on both.  Past reporting (NPR, Washington Post) suggests that indigent defense programs are the focus.  But based on our conversations with folks in the public interest community, it appears that the program’s scope is not as yet fully defined, and thus it could end up looking at access-to-justice issues in both the criminal and civil arenas.] 

• 3.9.10 – Atlanta Journal-Constitution – a lawyer appointed to represent an accused double murderer urged the Georgia Supreme Court to either dismiss the charges or prohibit the prosecution from seeking the death penalty because the state’s indigent defense fund has “been unable to pay for attorneys fees, investigators, or expert witnesses.”  The Gwinnett County district attorney agreed that the state’s public defense system, which was created by the legislature in 2003, is broken, and went so far as to argue that “the indigent defense statute violates the separation of powers because it transfer[s] control of funding capital cases from trial judges to the Georgia Public Defender Standards Council.” But, the prosecuting attorney contended that the matter should be sent back to trial as a capital case.  Link to article.

• 3.9.10 – Dover Post –  a brief Q&A with Delaware Public Defender Brendan O’Neill touches upon the public perception of defenders “trying to get the bad guy off the hook” as opposed to being guardians of all citizens’ rights, the overwhelming caseloads which many defenders are carrying, and his motivation for the career path he’s chosen.  Link to article.

• 3.9.10 – Philadelphia Inquirer – “Alarmed at a Philadelphia court system plagued by low conviction rates, entrenched witness fear, and a high number of fugitives, the state Supreme Court has appointed a blue-ribbon panel of legal experts to help craft a reform agenda.”  The Inquirer’s investigative reporting had earlier found “that nearly two-thirds of all violent-crime cases in the city end without a conviction on any charge.”  Also, Philadelphia has one of the nation’s highest fugitive rates, and courts have “made almost no effort” to collect forfeited bail funds.  Link to article.   [Ed. Note: Also see a 3.7.10 Inquirer story suggesting that Philadelphia’s Municipal Court reform efforts may be informed by the practices of local suburban courts.]

• 3.9.10 – Blog of the Legal Times – the ABA’s Death Penalty Representation Project has been struggling in the recent past to recruit pro bono counsel at precisely the time when public defense appellate offices are feeling the strains of budget cuts.  Link to post.

• 3.8.10 – Newark Advocate (Ohio) – in Licking County, Ohio, “defense attorneys representing indigent criminals billed for almost $1.4 million in fees in 2009,” 72% of which was paid with county funds, with the rest paid by state funds.  Nevertheless, court-appointed attorneys in Licking County are among the lowest paid appointed counsel in the state.  Over the years, fewer funds have flowed from state coffers to finance indigent defense programs, putting a strain on Ohio counties.  This has led to continuous questioning about whether an appointed counsel model is still preferable to creating a public defender’s office.  Link to article.

• 3.8.10 – National Law Journal – “At least 10 states are considering bills that would require drug testing for various government benefits.  Some want to screen welfare and food stamp recipients, while others want to test the jobless seeking unemployment benefits.  Some want to hit all three.”  A 6th Circuit decision emanating from a Michigan case held in 2002 that a state law requiring drug testing of welfare applicants violated the 4th Amendment.  Now, though, an Arizona law takes a slightly different tack.  Welfare applicants are required to complete a questionnaire about drug use.  “If any red flags go up, the person is required to take a drug test.”  The “red flags” give state authorities “reasonable cause” to test for drugs, which is required by the statute, and which proponents of drug-testing for public benefits think may pass constitutional muster.  Proposals in various states come in different shapes in sizes.  [Ed. note: they are surveyed in the story.]  The ACLU has emerged as the chief opponent of tying public benefit eligibility to drug testing.  Link to article. Note: access to article restricted

• 3.8.10 – New York Law Journal –  In a report issued last week, the New York City Bar and the City Bar Justice Center detailed progress made through their Deferred Associate Law Extern Support Project, which took form in 2009 to connect deferred associates to the public interest community and to provide ongoing support to help ensure that their public-service placements were fruitful both for them and their host organizations.  Surveys of deferred associates were illuminating.  They expressed broad-based satisfaction with their placements overall – “[n]early 92 percent said they would recommend their placement to deferred associates in the future” – but gave lower ratings on measures of their integration into their host organization’s culture.  Associates also expressed frustration with lack of communication from their law firms.  Link to article.  [Ed. Note: the report itself is available here.] 

• 3.7.10 – National Public Radio – “Increasingly, [in Massachusetts,] companies that plead guilty to crimes that harm the community – polluting, for example – are being required to publish an apology as part of their punishment.”  Shaming has for years been used in punishing individuals for any number of offenses, and in the legal community the debate about whether this form of punishment serves retribution or deterrence goals is alive in the context of shaming business entities.  Shaming may still lead to ostracizing just as it may with individual people, but, as one criminal law professor notes, a corporation does not feel and can not be emotionally scarred as a person may be.  Link to story (audio and print).  

• 3.7.10 – Boston Globe – “Nationally, 43 of the top 100 [law] firms have delayed the start dates of new associates hired last year … and almost all large commercial law firms in Boston deferred the contracts of new recruits.”  Some firms have helped facilitate their deferred associates’ placements in nonprofit or public sector organizations.  Goodwin Procter’s “Make a Difference” program attracted 86 of the firms deferred associates to work for a year in public service settings.  Ropes & Gray’s “New Alternatives” program is similar.  Not all deferred associates are using public service placements for personal development; one newly minted lawyer who was deferred from Edwards Angell Palmer & Dodge competed in the Iditarod race in Alaska.  Link to article.

• 3.7.10 – Dayton Daily News – The Ohio 2nd District Court of Appeals has reversed six cases, presided over by one Montgomery County District Court judge, in which “defendants facing possible jail time were being run through the system without attorneys.”  In those cases, there was not sufficient evidence that the defendants had waived their right to counsel.  In some hearings, an appellate judge noted, there was not even evidence that a prosecutor was there.  One local law professor who also has worked as an acting judge, thinks this problem is “a symptom of a massive docket overload … There is a temptation to cut corners.  There’s a lot of incentive to move cases through the system.”  Link to article.

• Albany Times Union (New York) – “[S]tate funding cuts threaten to slash Albany County’s homelessness prevention funding … Housing advocates warn the cuts not only will cause a surge in the already rising number of people forced from their homes amid the nation’s worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, but will also cost taxpayers more in the end” because of the financial burdens associated with social services that the newly homeless will use.”   Link to article.

• 3.5.10 – WDSU Television Station Website (New Orleans) – New Orleans Parish’s chief public defender “said in the next two months half his staff will have to refuse new felony cases because the…office is saddled with more than it can handle. Lawyers are handling an average of 300 felony cases a year. That’s twice the amount for state and national standards.  The reason: the public defender’s office needs more money.”  In addition to underfunding, another strain on the defender’s office is the district attorney’s practice of accepting a high percentage (90%) of cases for prosecution.   Link to story (text and video report).  [Ed. Note: The PSLawNet Blog interviewed Chief Defender Derwyn Bunton earlier this year, and asked him about funding issues in the long-term.  Mr. Bunton expressed cautious optimism, but of course the bar is pretty low because indigent defense funding in Louisiana has historically been weak.]   

• 3.6.10 – NJ.com Website (New Jersey) – Cumberland County’s new top prosecutor plans to cut some costs in light of a county government budget crisis, and reducing a backlog of criminal cases on the courthouse’s docket, which contributes to strains on the jail system as defendants, as well as crime victims and their families, wait extended periods of time for their day in court.  The county prosecutor, Jennifer Webb-McRae, also recognizes that making plea deals, while perhaps not fitting the public’s expectations about being tough on crime, is necessary to keep the wheels of justice turning.  Link to article.    

• 3.6.10 – Palm Beach Post (Florida) – State Attorney Michael MCAuliffe, Palm Beach County’s chief prosecutor for the past year, has shaken up his office’s traditional practices by taking an “aggressive tack on exacting higher penalties for offenders,” engaging directly (and frequently) with the media, forging a stronger relationship with law enforcement, and paring down on attorneys and staff, which included “ordering them out of the office on the same day.”  Some in the legal community are concerned that line prosecutors’ morale is low, and that they feel constrained in handling their docket because of McAuliffe’s emphasis on getting convictions instead of plea-bargaining.  McAuliffe is unapologetic, and does not entertain questions about whether he has future political aspirations.  Link to article.

• 3.5.10 – New York Times “City Room” Blog – new guidelines from NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg on how cases will be assigned to indigent defense organizations have stirred debate about whether “the new rules will take work from experienced lawyers and overburden less experienced ones.”  Previously, the Legal Aid Society or other nonprofit defender services accepted what cases they could, and other case divvied our through an assigned counsel system.  The new guidelines could funnel more cases to the Legal Aid Society and counterpart organizations, and also lawyers who participate in the assigned counsel program “will be expected to provide a larger network of services [for indigent defense cases], such as social workers, paralegals and investigators.”  Attorneys who have served in the assigned counsel program question whether they have the resources to meet such expectations.  Link to blog post.