Following up on his commentary about how problem-solving models can help lawyers (and law students) to solve legal problems systematically and to communicate legal solutions persuasively in writing, Troy Simpson discusses what makes a good problem-solving model.
Criminal Justice Resources Public Defense Systems
By Ken Strutin
Ken Strutin (JD, MLS) is an experienced law librarian, criminal defense attorney, and well-known writer and speaker. He is the author of The Insider’s Guide: Criminal Justice Resources on the Internet, and has lectured extensively about the benefits of using the Internet for legal research at national and local CLE training programs. Mr. Strutin also wrote ALI-ABA’s Practice Checklist Manual on Representing Criminal Defendants, and co-authored the award winning Legal Research Methodology computer tutorial, published by the Center for Computer-Assisted Legal Instruction (CALI). He has contributed chapters to several books and written many articles concerning knowledge management, legal research and criminal law. Mr. Strutin has taught courses in Advanced Legal Research and Law Office Management. He is also listed in Who’s Who in American Law. Currently, Mr. Strutin is the Director of Legal Information Services at the New York State Defenders Association and writes a column for the New York Law Journal. Other guides by Ken Strutin on LLRX.com.
Published June 18, 2006
Introduction
This is a select collection of resources about public defense systems in the United States. The focus is on key studies, reports, and reference materials published on the web..
#public%2520defense”>Public Defense Directories
#reports”>Reports
#resource%2520centers”>Resource Centers
#standards”>Standards
#criminal%2520defense”>Criminal Defense Lawyer Associations
#eligibility”>Eligibility #commissions”>Commissions #resources”>Resources
Nationwide
Federal
State
<#Table%2520of%2520Contents”>Table of Contents> Resource Centers
In many states, public defenders, legal aid and assigned counsel rely on the support services provided by backup centers. These offices respond to the research and training needs of public defense attorneys, monitor case law and legislative developments, answer questions from the client community and members of the public, and serve as a clearinghouse for public defense advocacy and policy research.
Nationwide
States
Criminal Defense Lawyers Associations
There are many statewide and local criminal defense associations, as well as sections of general bar associations, that have dedicated resources to public defense work. The lists below provide web links to many of these groups.
Public defense systems vary from place to place. Some have established statewide systems and operate under commissions, while others are patchwork arrangements. And a few states are reevaluating their defender systems. Information about commissions and related developments can be found in the Spangenberg studies below. Underneath is a selection of state websites.
Nationwide
States Links Arkansas Public Defender Commission California California Habeas Corpus Resource Center Colorado State Public Defender Commission
Alternate Defense Counsel Commission
Connecticut Public Defender Services Commission District of Columbia Public Defender Service Florida Florida Public Defender Association Georgia Georgia Public Defender Standards Council Hawaii Defender Council Illinois Office of State Appellate Defender Indiana Public Defender Commission Iowa Indigent Defense Advisory Commission Kansas State Board of Indigents’ Defense Services Kentucky Department of Public Advocacy Louisiana Louisiana Indigent Defense Assistance Board
Louisiana Task Force on Indigent Defense
Maryland Public Defender Massachusetts Committee for Public Counsel Services Michigan Appellate Defender Commission Minnesota Minnesota Public Defenders Missouri Public Defender Commission Montana Public Defender Commission Nebraska Nebraska Commission on Public Advocacy New Hampshire Judicial Council
New York
New York State Commission on the Future of Indigent Defense Services
North Carolina Public Defender Commission North Dakota North Dakota Commission on Legal Counsel for Indigents Ohio Hamilton County Public Defender Commission
Oklahoma Oklahoma Indigent Defense System Oregon Public Defense Services Commission North Carolina Public Defender Commission South Carolina Indigent Defense Commission Texas Texas Task Force on Indigent Defens Virginia Indigent Defense Commission
Virginia Indigent Defense Commission
Washington Office of Public Defense Wisconsin State Public Defender
<#Table%2520of%2520Contents”>Table of Contents>
The major bar associations, private research groups and government agencies have published reports on different aspects of public defense. They include systemwide surveys, funding studies, caseload analyses and highlights of significant problems and unmet mandates.
Compilations
Nationwide Studies
Gideon 40th Anniversary Sites
States
States
These are compilations of national and state standards for the criminal justice system, and public defense in particular.
Compilations
Resources
<#Table%2520of%2520Contents”>Table of Contents>
The ability to afford counsel depends on many factors, and the assessment of those factors determines whether an accused will receive assigned representation. Below are several guidelines, albeit starting points, used in making this determination.
Guidelines
Reports
These resources are excellent starting points for locating national and local materials on public defense systems and the implementation of the right to counsel. The Resource Centers listed above are another good place to find information about a particular state’s system.
Organizations
Bibliographies and Libraries
<#Table%2520of%2520Contents”>Table of Contents>
Getting a Grip on the ‘CSI Effect’: The National Clearinghouse for Science, Technology and the Law at Stetson University College of Law
By Diana Botluk and Brittan Mitchell
Diana Botluk is the Director of Research at the National Clearinghouse for Science, Technology and the Law at Stetson University College of Law, and author of The Legal List: Research on the Internet. Brittan Mitchell is a Law and Science Fellow at the National Clearinghouse for Science, Technology and the Law at Stetson University College of Law, and supervises its pro bono research program at Stetson.
M. Sean Fosmire is with the Michigan law firm of Garan Lucow Miller, P.C.
M. Sean Fosmire is with the Michigan law firm of Garan Lucow Miller, P.C.
eFiling Comes of Age By Phil Ytterberg and Scott Schumacher
Phil Ytterberg is Market Development Manager for WestFile ( tm ) at West Group. Mr. Ytterberg manages market development for the WestFile Electronic Filing Service, with responsibility for the legal and regulatory markets. He is a graduate of Tufts University and the Boston University School of Law. He regularly delivers presentations on electronic court filing at conferences and symposia nationwide, including faculty presentations for the National Center for State Court’s Institute for Court Management (ICM) and the National Practice Institute (NPI).
Electronic Discovery – Or, the Byte that Bit By George Socha
George Socha is a shareholder with Halleland Lewis Nilan Sipkins & Johnson whose practice focuses on complex toxic tort, products liability, and commercial litigation. George also concentrates on the effective use of technology to support and enhance the practice of law. In addition to overseeing the firm’s selection, implementation and use of computer technology, Mr. Socha is co-chair of the Subcommittee on Litigation Technologies, Committee on Corporate Counsel, ABA Section of Litigation; a member of the Minnesota State Bar Association’s Technology Committee; and a member of the ABA TechShow’s advisory board. He served as an ABA liaison to the group that created the Uniform Task Based Management System and on the ABA Working Group on Litigation Support Software Guidelines. He has written and lectured extensively on the use of technology in the practice of law. Mr. Socha received a J.D. from Cornell Law School in 1987.