Nearly a half million people, or approximately three percent of Florida's adults, pass through the state's misdemeanor courts each year. Most are found guilty. The average court appearance lasts as little as three minutes. [Released July 2011]

and Attorney Workload Standards

The Sixth Amendment's promise that every person accused of a crime is entitled to counsel is a hollow one when the attorney appointed lacks the time and resources to provide meaningful representation. In order to determine whether defenders in Rhode Island are facing a caseload crisis, NACDL, the American Bar Association Standing Committee on Legal Aid and Indigent Defendants (ABA SCLAID), and the accounting firm of BlumShapiro undertook an assessment of the Rhode Island Public Defender system ("RIPD"). [Released November 2017]

When a person is accused of a crime, the U.S. Constitution guarantees that person the right to a lawyer even if they cannot afford one. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed this basic principle more than a half century ago in Gideon v. Wainwright, and in subsequent cases that expanded the right to misdemeanor prosecutions. Yet this right is violated every day in South Carolina’s magistrate and municipal courts – collectively referred to as summary courts – where scores of people are convicted, sentenced, and sometimes incarcerated, without having been represented by counsel. [Released April 2016]

The crisis in public defense in Louisiana has been well-documented by the news media over the past several years. Stories of overloaded public defenders, unrepresented individuals languishing in jail, and mass pleas have shocked the nation’s conscience, but the system’s shortcomings have long evaded reform. However, much coverage of the public defense crisis in Louisiana, the state with the highest incarceration rate in the nation, has focused its attention on the consequences of the crisis rather than its causes. [Released March 2017]

Researchers systematically gathered data from magistrate and municipal courts in five counties. The research confirms that there is a pervasive lack of procedural justice and fairness in these courts. Far too many accused persons are not advised of basic constitutional rights, and even when they are, those rights are not respected. [Released January 2017]

In 2012, NACDL collaborated with the American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on Legal Aid and Indigent Defendants (SCLAID) to host an innovative project to foment broad-based reform. This report highlights the wide-ranging discussion and innovative proposals for reform discussed during the focus group. [Released January 2013]

On April 6 and 7, 2017, NACDL, the Foundation for Criminal Justice, the Monroe Freedman Institute for the Study of Legal Ethics at Hofstra University’s Maurice A. Deane School of Law, the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, the Center for Court Innovation, and the State of New York Unified Court System convened a conference designed to explore the impediments to and reforms needed to ensure effective justice in all stages of the criminal process, with a particular focus on the judicial role in high-volume misdemeanor courts. [Released December 2017]

The Right to Counsel in State Courts

This 50-state Survey of Right to Counsel Standards documents how states decide when a qualifying individual charged with criminal wrongdoing is entitled to receive appointed counsel. Some states only appoint counsel in cases of actual incarceration following conviction, while others mandate appointed counsel based solely on the fact that a defendant has been charged with a crime. Other states fall between these standards and appoint counsel when a sentence of incarceration is authorized or likely to be imposed following conviction. [Released October 2016]

This 50-State Survey of Financial Eligibility Guidelines for Assigned Counsel documents how states decide who is “too poor” to hire a lawyer. The survey looks at how states define “indigency” and whether or not that definition is consistent with ABA standards for providing defense services. It identifies which states rely on the Federal Poverty Guidelines when determining eligibility for assigned counsel, and explains the origin of the Federal Poverty Guidelines and how they cannot accurately predict who is “too poor” to hire a lawyer. [Released March 2014]

This report documents the unreasonably low rates of compensation paid to private attorneys who represent indigent defendants in state courts. The lack of adequate funding restricts the pool of attorneys willing to represent indigent defendants and creates conflicts of interest for attorneys by encouraging them to limit the amount of work they perform on a case for an indigent client. [Released March 2013]

NACDL created The Commission to Reform the Federal Grand Jury, drawing on the expertise of a variety of professionals throughout the criminal justice system. Commissioners spent two years examining the need for changes in the grand jury process and produced a Federal Grand Jury Bill of Rights based on their findings. The ten reforms set forth in this Bill of Rights, largely echoing those proposed by the American Bar Association (ABA) more than 20 years ago, would restore balance to the grand jury process and better protect against unwarranted prosecutions. [Released May 2000]

Bond: Policy presented by Brandon Buskey, Deputy Director for Smart Justice Litigation, Criminal Law Reform Project, American Civil Liberties Union

Race Matters I: The Impact of Race on Criminal Justice
September 14-15, 2017 | Detroit, MI

While there are a variety of ways in which public defense is provided, to fulfill their constitutional obligations systems must have an infrastructure which ensures timely access to resourced, skilled, and zealous advocates and which operates as an independent and equal partner in the community's criminal legal system.

Brief for Harris County Public Defender, Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo*, Harris County Commissioner Rodney Ellis, Precinct 1* and National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as Amicus Curiae in Support of Plaintiffs-Appellees (*as elected officials and not on behalf of Harris County government).

Argument: A determination of bail, pursuant to TEX. CODE CRIM. P. ART. 15.17, at a defendant’s initial appearance, is a critical stage of trial requiring the assistance of counsel. The district court’s findings and conclusions aptly support this proposition. An unrepresented defendant before a magistrate at first appearance has the untenable choice of speaking on her own behalf for release – and possibly saying something that may later be used against her – or lose that opportunity to advocate for freedom by remaining silent. Once that first bail determination has been made, the chance of changing it, particularly to lower bail, significantly diminishes. That loss of liberty has a direct detrimental effect on a defendant’s outcome at trial. In support, Amicus Curiae will offer its current relevant experience and data, some of which were previously accepted as fact by another United States District Judge and a panel of this Honorable Court of Appeals.

The attorney-client privilege is fundamental to fairness and balance in our justice system and essential to corporate compliance regimes. Government-coerced waiver has become a multi-agency problem that requires a multi-agency solution. A Presidential Executive Order applying reforms like those adopted by the Department of Justice in the 2008 Filip Memo or comprehensive legislation like the Attorney-Client Privilege Protection Act described below would protect the attorney-client and work product privileges, as well as employee constitutional rights, during investigations.