Argumentative Essay On Public Defense System
The public defense system is a way for poor people accused of a crime who cannot afford an attorney that can actually put their full focus on defending them. The problem with this system is that the people who need to be defended are not treated with priority and are often forced to take a plea deal to save time, or are just not accurately represented during trial. This is not fair to the person accused of committing the crime, but not the fault of the public defender also. These defenders have no choice in the amount of cases they get and in the end, they cannot focus on one because they have a quote they each have to meet. In reasearch found by the US Department of Justice “about 73% of county public defender offices exceeded the maximum
recommended limit of cases (150 felonies or 400 misdemeanors)” ( “Poor“). This means about a quarter of public defenders have to take on more than the norm they are actually required to do. When one has a public defender that doesn't have the time to look over there case, it often leads to a quick assumptions being made by the attorney in order to make the case go by faster. This could mean the attorney does not properly look over the case, they may insist the person accused take a plea deal to save time, or the defendant must simply sit in jail and wait until the trial happens to actually see progress in their case. This not only affects the defendant, but the people who are involved with them also. It is inconvenient to everyone involved, but simply because it is usually poor defenders that need these attorneys, no one cares to fix it. Not only is this an inconvenience, it is also technically against ethical law for the attorneys. Defendants have the right to an attorney that can diligently look over their case and represent them. If a defender loses a case and feels it was the fault of an incompetent attorney, they can get the case appealed. An attorney being incompetent can be defined as either failing to ask for bond reduction, failure to interview a witness, or a push speedy trial (Bannon). So the condition of the public defense system is essentially harmful to everyone involved. Not only does it leave the defendant with a defense that is not to its best standard, it can leave the defendant open to disciplined for a failure of ethical defending.
recommended limit of cases (150 felonies or 400 misdemeanors)” ( “Poor“). This means about a quarter of public defenders have to take on more than the norm they are actually required to do. When one has a public defender that doesn't have the time to look over there case, it often leads to a quick assumptions being made by the attorney in order to make the case go by faster. This could mean the attorney does not properly look over the case, they may insist the person accused take a plea deal to save time, or the defendant must simply sit in jail and wait until the trial happens to actually see progress in their case. This not only affects the defendant, but the people who are involved with them also. It is inconvenient to everyone involved, but simply because it is usually poor defenders that need these attorneys, no one cares to fix it. Not only is this an inconvenience, it is also technically against ethical law for the attorneys. Defendants have the right to an attorney that can diligently look over their case and represent them. If a defender loses a case and feels it was the fault of an incompetent attorney, they can get the case appealed. An attorney being incompetent can be defined as either failing to ask for bond reduction, failure to interview a witness, or a push speedy trial (Bannon). So the condition of the public defense system is essentially harmful to everyone involved. Not only does it leave the defendant with a defense that is not to its best standard, it can leave the defendant open to disciplined for a failure of ethical defending.