The San Benito County Superior Court’s system for weighing
defendants’ eligibility for free public defender services usually
goes no further than the two local judges deciding
”
on the spot
”
– and often without substantiation – whether those suspects have
the financial capability to afford the costs of their
attorneys.
The San Benito County Superior Court’s system for weighing defendants’ eligibility for free public defender services usually goes no further than the two local judges deciding “on the spot” – and often without substantiation – whether those suspects have the financial capability to afford the costs of their attorneys.
With the public defender budget nearing the $1 million mark this fiscal year, and on the heels of the Michael Rodrigues rape case that will pinch taxpayers for around $150,000, the issue of eligibility for the services has come up in discussions among county and court officials.
After the Rodrigues convictions, a prosecutor contended Rodrigues actually had the financial ability to fund his defense while claiming he could have sold off assets.
As it stands, there is no structured examination done when defendants request a public defender beyond the two judges’ “on the spot” assessments, Court Executive Officer Gil Solorio acknowledged to the Free Lance. County court systems do, however, have the legal discretion to establish criteria and mechanisms for weighing residents’ financial ability to fund their attorneys’ fees without necessitating use of the public defender.
In San Benito County, the judges routinely ask the defendants – before ruling on granting the services – whether they have a job, how much they earn and if they have a wife or kids. They occasionally ask if they own a home as well.
From a taxpayers’ perspective, it’s a complex issue because the board of supervisors sets the public defender’s budget and allocates the funds. The local court, however, has jurisdiction over such practices as the weighing of public defender eligibility because it remains under administration of the state system.
Solorio, though, pointed out that County Administrative Officer Susan Thompson recently has initiated talks with the presiding judge, Steven Sanders, about the issue of public defender eligibility and whether the process here can be changed.
Neither Thompson nor Sanders could be reached before press time, but Solorio credited the CAO for taking a “proactive” approach while he noted she is “concerned about it because it is largely a county expense.”
There might be a benefit, on one hand, by eliminating some of those costs by targeting individuals who have the financial resources for legal services but still use the public defender.
The county’s contracted public defender, however, believes the system in place works best and that adding another step to the process – to qualify residents for the services – would “throw a big monkey wrench into the court.”
Public Defender Gregory LaForge – whose office costs total $360,000 annually – noted how San Benito County for a brief period about 10 years ago tried to use a welfare worker to qualify residents for the services, but that it “totally slowed up the process.”
“It didn’t work and it wouldn’t work,” he said.
For the full story, see the Free Lance on Tuesday.
