Public defenders to get some relief

SEATTLE – For the first time, Washington’s Supreme Court is setting limits on the number of cases that public defenders can handle – an effort to improve the quality of legal representation for some of the 200,000 poor people prosecuted in the state every year, but one that could increase costs to local governments at a time of tight budgets.

By a vote of 7-2, the justices said lawyers who represent indigent defendants generally should handle no more than 150 felony cases per year or 300 to 400 misdemeanor cases, and even fewer when the cases are complex. The caseload standards will take effect in September 2013 to avoid imminent hits to local budgets, Chief Justice Barbara Madsen said in announcing them Friday.

“Innocent people are convicted if they don’t have an adequate defense,” said Joanne Moore, director of the state’s Office of Public Defense. “There’s been a lot of information in the past few years that many attorneys who are providing public defense are burdened by very high caseloads, and they haven’t been able to give the proper amount of attention to their public defense cases.”

The high court also took another step Friday to help people who can’t afford legal help, adopting a rule that allows non-lawyers with certain levels of training to give legal advice in civil matters, such as selecting and completing court forms, and reviewing and explaining pleadings.

The state bar association previously adopted caseload standards for indigent defense, but they were hardly enforced. Several years ago, the Legislature passed a law providing money to cities that made strides toward meeting the bar association standards; last year, a dozen cities received grants ranging from $2,500 to $150,000.

With the standards now enshrined by the Supreme Court, they’ll have more teeth. Lawyers who take on indigent clients will have to certify on a quarterly basis that they’re complying, and courts could refuse to allow them to be appointed in such cases if they don’t.

It isn’t clear how much the new standards might cost cities and counties around the state. The amount is expected to vary depending on existing caseloads. Further, the new standards include a weighting process by which serious offenses or complex cases count more, and post-conviction proceedings such as parole violations count as partial cases.

Public defender caseloads have “been an issue the whole time I’ve been a bar member,” said Justice Susan Owens, who voted for the new standards. “There’ve been some major problems around the state. The size of the caseloads nationally has been shown to be an issue in creating stress and damaging the quality of indigent defense.”

Potential costs to cities and counties “was probably one of the major concerns, but the bottom line is it’s a constitutional mandate that our forefathers put in the state and the national constitutions,” Owens added. “Hopefully the state has taken on some obligations to fund it and hopefully they’ll step up to the plate and help out with that a little more.”

Two justices voted against the new standards, Charles Johnson and Mary Fairhurst. Johnson was unavailable to comment Friday, and Fairhurst declined to speak with a reporter.