Bexar County Indigent Defense System Evaluation



Public Policy Research Institute



September 2020



Bexar County Indigent Defense

System Evaluation



Bexar County Indigent Defense

System Evaluation



PublicPolicyResearchInstitute‐TexasA&MUniversity

September2020



FundingforthisresearchwasprovidedbyBexarCountyandtheTexasIndigentDefenseCommission.



iii



TableofContents

ExecutiveSummary.....................................................................................................................................vii



Introduction..................................................................................................................................................1

QualityRepresentation.............................................................................................................................1

AmericanBarAssociation’sTenPrinciplesofaPublicDefenseDeliverySystem.................................5

BexarCountyIndigentDefenseSystem....................................................................................................6

ComparisonoftheBexarCountyIndigentDefenseSystemtoPeerCounties.........................................6

Per‐CaseSpending................................................................................................................................7

CaseloadComparison...........................................................................................................................8

Court‐AppointedAttorneyRequirements..........................................................................................12

OrganizationoftheReport.....................................................................................................................13

Methodology...............................................................................................................................................14

QuantitativeData....................................................................................................................................14

QualitativeData......................................................................................................................................14

Interviews............................................................................................................................................14

DefendantSurvey...............................................................................................................................15

QualityofService........................................................................................................................................16

BexarCountyTimelines..........................................................................................................................16

Attorney‐ClientContact..........................................................................................................................21

AttorneyComplaints&Discipline...........................................................................................................23

BailReduction.........................................................................................................................................24

Conclusion...............................................................................................................................................25

QualityofRepresentation...........................................................................................................................26

Defendants..............................................................................................................................................26

Judges&CountyOfficials........................................................................................................................28

Attorneys.................................................................................................................................................28

BexarCountyIndigentDefenseSystem..................................................................................................29

ContinuingLegalEducation(CLE)Requirements....................................................................................30

MentalHealth&OpioidIssues...............................................................................................................32

Conclusion...............................................................................................................................................34

ComparisonofRepresentation...................................................................................................................35

iv



MultivariateLogisticRegressionAnalysis...............................................................................................40

Conclusion...............................................................................................................................................40

BexarCountyPublicDefenderOffice.........................................................................................................41

CountyCourtatLaw12...........................................................................................................................45

Conclusion...............................................................................................................................................45

JudicialEvaluation.......................................................................................................................................46

Judge&CountyOfficials’Morale............................................................................................................46

BenchAppointments..............................................................................................................................46

Wheelvs.Non‐WheelAppointments.................................................................................................52

VerticalRepresentation......................................................................................................................53

JudicialPractices.....................................................................................................................................55

AppointmentofInvestigators&Experts............................................................................................55

VoucherReimbursement........................................................................................................................57

Conclusion...............................................................................................................................................59

Recommendations......................................................................................................................................60

StakeholderRecommendations..............................................................................................................60

PPRIDataRecommendations.................................................................................................................61

PPRIPolicyRecommendations...............................................................................................................64

ManagedAssignedCounselSystemSuccessesinTexas.....................................................................66

Conclusion...............................................................................................................................................66



PUBLICPOLICYRESEARCHINSTITUTE



4476TAMU

CollegeStation,TX77843‐4476



Tel.979.845.8800Fax.979.845.0249

http://ppri.tamu.edu



The Honorable Nelson W. Wolff

101 W. Nueva, 10th Floor

San Antonio, Texas 78205

September 7, 2020

Dear Judge Wolff,

Please find enclosed the final report titled “Bexar County Indigent Defense System Evaluation,”

reviewing the county’s current indigent defense practices. While the report was requested by the

Bexar County Commissioners Court in response to Bexar County court judges approving fee

increases for court-appointed attorneys to represent indigent defendants in misdemeanor cases

(going into effect on September 1, 2018), the initiative further highlights the determination of the

county to improve the quality of the indigent defense system in Bexar County and is in line with

other recent efforts the county has embarked on.

This report was the product of collaboration with the Texas Indigent Defense Commission (TIDC),

which also shared part of the expenses to help fund the study. Prior to reaching out to the Public

Policy Research Institute (PPRI) at Texas A&M University, the county with its leaderships across

different departments had embarked on a series of collaborative group meetings to develop a

detailed scope of work to help direct the focus of the report. The main objective of the report was

to ensure quality representation for indigent defendants by evaluating process and procedures

associated with Bexar County’s Court Appointed Counsel system. Quantitative and qualitative

analysis were to be conducted to analyze measurable metrics to determine the quality of service

and representation (in the county and relative to regional and national standards), compare

representation across different providers, and to examine judicial evaluation. Further, the report

was to identify current educational and professional requirements for court-appointed counsel

practicing in Bexar County, and recommend implementation of specific requirements to improve

quality of representation for indigent defendants.

The PPRI has been established by the Texas Legislature in 1983 to conduct research to inform

policy-making in Texas and beyond. The institute currently has about 36 full time research staff

with different levels of expertise from PhDs in economics, political science, public health, to other

applied research experience in criminal justice, education, public health, and other areas. Since its

inception, the PPRI has secured more than $150 million in externally funded projects averaging

between $4 and $6 million a year. The PPRI has conducted research on behalf of federal, state,

private, and international clients such as the Department of Justice, National Science Foundation,

PUBLICPOLICYRESEARCHINSTITUTE



4476TAMU

CollegeStation,TX77843‐4476



Tel.979.845.8800Fax.979.845.0249

http://ppri.tamu.edu

National Institutes of Health, Texas Department of Transportation, Texas Education Agency,

Office of Court Administration, Texas Indigent Defense Commission, Arnold Ventures, Robert

Wood Johnson Foundation, and the United Nations. Policy reports by PPRI have been featured by

national news media outlets, and cited by policy makers such as the Attorney General, Secretary

of Education, and the President of the United States.

The PPRI at Texas A&M University took the lead evaluating current indigent defense practices

starting in the fall of 2019 and ending in the spring of 2020. All study data collection occurred

before the world pandemic caused by COVID-19. Quantitative and qualitative methods were both

utilized in the current study including case level data from the Bexar County Justice Information

System (CJIS), interviews with judges, county staff, attorneys, and defendants. The research team

analyzed more than 90,000 criminal cases in the county, interviewed 11 judges, 19 county staff,

43 attorneys, and 197 defendants. The PPRI would like to express its deepest gratitude to all

judges, attorneys, defendants, county staff and officials who have graciously given us their time to

answer difficult questions and be as open as possible in their responses.

The report highlights current legal requirements to every metric surrounding indigent defense, the

American Bar Association (ABA) best practices, the Bexar County Indigent Defense Plan

addressing each metric, current practices in the county, and the research team’s recommendations.

The PPRI deeply appreciated the opportunity to work with Bexar County officials, and we hope

you find this report helpful in guiding the county’s next steps in improving the quality of the

indigent defense system in the county.

Sincerely,

George Naufal, PhD

Public Policy Research Institute

Texas A&M University



vii



ExecutiveSummary

BexarCountycourtjudgesincreasedfeepaymentstocourt‐appointedattorneysbeginningin

September2018.Inresponse,theBexarCountyCommissionersCourtrequestedanevaluationto

examinequalityindigentdefenserepresentationinthecounty.BexarCountyisalsotransitioningtoa

newdatamanagementsystem,providinganexcellentopportunitytoevaluatecurrentdatabase

measuresinthecounty.



ThePublicPolicyResearchInstitute(PPRI)atTexasA&MUniversityconductedanevaluationofBexar

County’sindigentdefensesystem,utilizingamulti‐methodapproachwithquantitativeandqualitative

data.PPRIevaluatedthreeyearsofBexarCountycriminalcasedata.Inaddition,PPRIconducted

numerousinterviewsandsurveyswithdefendants,attorneys,judges,andcountyofficials.



Chapter3:QualityofService

BexarCountyismeetingstatutorytimelinesformagistrationwithin48hoursofarrest,butcompliance

withotherstatutorytimelinesaredifficulttoanalyzeduetodatalimitations.Requestforcounsel,

attorneycontact,andcomplaintsarenottrackedwithinthecurrentdatamanagementsystem.Any

futuredatasystemimplementedmustincorporatethesemeasures.Almost40%ofdefendantssurveyed

statedtheyfirstmettheirattorneyincourt,andabout40%ofdefendantsdidnotfeelinformedabout

theappointmentprocess.

Chapter4:QualityofRepresentation

Allstakeholdersviewedcommunicationasakeyattributeneededtoprovidequalityrepresentationto

defendants.PPRIexaminedBexarCounty’sindigentdefensesystemusingtheAmericanBar

Association’sTenPrinciplesofaPublicDefenseSystem.AlthoughBexarCountyisfollowingmanyof

theseprinciples,severalprinciplescouldbeincorporatedwithreformstothecurrentsystem.

Severalqualityindicatorsarenottracked,suchasattorney‐clientcontact,complaints,andrequestfor

counsel.Theseissuesmustbeaddressedinthenewdatamanagementsystem.BexarCountyhasmade

significantprogressinaddressingmentalhealthissuesofdefendants,butstakeholdersfeltthatmore

progressneedstobemade.

Chapter5:ComparisonofRepresentation

BexarCountyrequestedanevaluationofoutcomesbasedoncounseltype.PPRIexaminedoutcomes

betweencourt‐appointedandretainedcounsel.Duetothetypesofcasesandlimitedcaseloadofthe

BexarCountyPublicDefenderOffice,comparisonscouldnotbemadebetweenallcounseltypes.Better

defendantoutcomesresultfromretainedattorneys,withcourt‐appointedcounsellesslikelytobe

associatedwithdismissalsrelativetoretainedcounsel.Court‐appointedattorneysaremorelikelytobe

associatedwithpleasrelativetoretainedcounsel,andcourt‐appointedattorneysaremorelikelytobe

associatedwithincarcerationsrelativetoretainedcounsel.

Chapter6:BexarCountyPublicDefenderOffice

TheBexarCountyPublicDefenderOfficehasalimitedcaseload,whichincludesspecializedcases.The

uniquecaseloadofthePublicDefenderOfficemakescomparisonsbetweenpublicdefenders,court‐

appointedattorneys,andretainedattorneysproblematic;therefore,thepublicdefendercaseloadis

examinedindependently.





viii



Chapter7:JudicialEvaluation

Certaincourtsappointfromthebenchmoreoftenthanothers.Reasonsforappointmentfromthe

bencharenottrackedwithinthecurrentdatasystem.PPRIalsoexaminedifattorneyswereappointed

fromthebenchwithoutbeingontheappointmentwheel.Countycourtsappearedtoappointattorneys

notontheappointmentlistmorethandistrictcourts.PPRIalsoexaminedrequestsforinvestigatorsand

experts.Theserequestsarecodeswithinthecurrentdatasystem,buttheydonotappeartobeutilized.

PPRIalsointerviewedcountyofficialsconcerningvoucherreimbursements.Severalindicatorsarenot

tracked,suchasreasonsforreducingvoucherpayments.



Chapter8:Recommendations

PPRImadepolicyanddatarecommendationsbasedonquantitativeandqualitativedatagatheredfrom

BexarCounty.Datarecommendationsinclude:implementqualitymetricsinthenewdatamanagement

system,includingTIDCRecommendedFunctionality&DataGuidelinesforIndigentDefenseTechnology

Projects.Policyrecommendationsinclude:informattorneysabouthowthedifferentspecialtycourts

function,employanIndigentDefenseCoordinatorprogramtoassistdefendantswiththeappointment

process,andimplementaManagedAssignedCounsel(MAC)programinconjunctionwiththePublic

DefenderOfficetoincreaseaccountabilityandsupervisionofcourt‐appointedcounsel.



1



  Introduction

BexarCountyCourtjudgesapprovedfeeincreasesforcourt‐appointedattorneystorepresentindigent

defendants.Intheirjointorderrevisingthecounty‐widefeeschedule,thejudgesnotedthat

misdemeanantpaymentguidelineswereconstructedto“assurequalityrepresentationforindigent

personschargedwithmisdemeanorcrimesinBexarCounty.Thefeessetforthbythisordertakeinto

considerationthetimeandlaborrequired,thecomplexityofthecases,andtheexperienceandabilityof

appointedcounsel.”

AsofSeptember1,2018,theseamendedpaymentswentintoeffect.Acrossthe

board,paymentstoattorneystakingmisdemeanorcasesincreasedby$40,goingfrom$140to$180.To

thisend,BexarCountyofficialsneedtoappreciatethatpaymentstocourt‐appointedattorneysmustbe

sufficienttoensurethatattorneyshavethenecessaryresourcestofindandinterviewwitnesses,obtain

andanalyzewitnesstestimony,consultwithexperts,understandrelevantcaselaw,andkeepclose

contactwiththeirclient.

Whileitispossiblethatincreasedpaymentsmayprovideattorneyswiththe

resourcesnecessarytopursuethevariouscomponentsofqualityrepresentation,itisnotclearthat

thesechangeswillgeneratebetterdispositions(dismissalsandchargereductions)forclients.Sinceno

performancemeasuresorstandardsareinplace–andthepayratecontinuestobelow–thereis

concernthatthisfeeincreasewillnotresultinimprovedqualityofrepresentationorimproved

outcomesforindigentdefendants.

TheBexarCountyCommissionersCourtrequestedanevaluationtobeconductedtoassesstheeffectof

thesechangesondefendantoutcomes.BexarCountyofficialshavealsoexpressedinterestin

contextualizingthisanalysiswithareviewofthecounty’sindigentdefensepractices.Becausethey

anticipatesystem‐wideinformationtechnologyupdatesintheimmediatefuture,assessingthe

availabilityofdataandsystemefficienciesisvitaltothatdevelopmentprocess.Further,givenTexas

IndigentDefenseCommission(TIDC)monitoringconcernsaboutwheelappointments,

anevaluationof

thefairnessofindigentdefensedeliveryandthequalityofindigentdefenserepresentationisneeded.In

October2018,BexarCountyofficialsapproachedthePublicPolicyResearchInstitute(PPRI)atTexas

A&MUniversitytopartneronastudytoevaluatecurrentindigentdefensepractices.Thestudybeganin

thefallof2019andendedinthespringof2020.Allstudydatacollectionoccurredbeforetheworld

pandemiccausedbyCOVID‐19.PriortoexaminingBexarCounty’sindigentdefensesystem,areviewof

theeffectsoffeeincreasesandqualitydefenserepresentationliteratureisneeded.

QualityRepresentation

In2002,theSpangenbergGroupconductedastate‐by‐stateanalysisofcompensationforcourt‐

appointedcounsel.

Atthattime,12statesleftthecompensationratestocourt‐appointedattorneysto

bedeterminedatthelocallevel.InTexastoday,compensationratesarestilllefttolocaljurisdictions.

Whiletheresearchliteratureontheimpactsoffeeincreasesforcourt‐appointedattorneysisfairly

small,Roach(2017)foundthatincreasesinthefeespaidtocourt‐appointedattorneysresultedinbetter



Jointorderrevisingfeeschedule,2018.

H.RussellCort;JackL.Sammons,TheSearchforGoodLawyering:AConceptandModelofLawyering

Competencies,29Clev.St.L.Rev.397(1980).

TaskForceonIndigentDefense,ReviewofBexarCounty’sIndigentDefenseSystems,2010.

TheSpangenbergGroup,RatesofCompensationPaidtoCourt‐AppointedCounselinNon‐CapitalFelonyCasesat

Trial:AState‐by‐StateOverview,PreparedfortheAmericanBarAssociation,2002.



2



outcomesfordefendantsinNewYork,includingreductionsinguiltypleasandconvictions.

Schwall

(2017)foundthatcourt‐appointedattorneysexpendedlesseffortontheircaseswhencomparedtoa

flatfeeversusanhourlyrate.



Mostresearchliteratureregardingqualitydefensefocusesonsystemsofrepresentationincludingpublic

defenderofficesandmanagedassignedcounselsystems(MAC).SincetheTexasStateLegislaturepassed

theFairDefenseActof2001(FDA)

,moreattentionhasfocusedonimprovingthequalityofindigent

defenseserviceswhilealsocontainingcosts.Theuseofpublicdefenderandmanagedassignedcounsel

systemsisconsideredastrategytomeetthesedualobjectives.TIDChaspriorityprogramareas

includingmanagedassignedcounselsystemsandpublicdefenderofficesthatputinplacemechanisms

toensurequalityrepresentation.PriortotheFDA,onlyfiveTexascountiesoperatedpublicdefender

officesservingadultdefendants.Currently,thereare20publicdefenderofficesandthreemanaged

assignedcounselprograms(showninTables1and2).



 



MichaelA.Roach(2017).Doesraisingindigentdefenderpayratesimprovedefendantoutcomes?Evidencefrom

NewYork,AppliedEconomicsLetters,24:14,1025‐1030,doi:10.1080/13504851.2016.1248281

BenjaminSchwall,MoreBangforYourBuck:HowtoImprovetheIncentiveStructureforIndigentDefenseCounsel,

14OhioSt.J.Crim.L.553(2017).

FairDefenseAct2001(SB7).

TexasIndigentDefenseCommission,IndigentDefenseDataforTexas,Availableat

http://www.tidc.texas.gov/media/46142/direct‐client‐services‐chart‐2018.pdf



3



Table1:TexasPublicDefenderOffices‐2018

ProgramName ServicesOffered

Year

Established

Participating

Counties

TravisCountyJuvenile

PDO

Juvenile 1971 Travis

DallasCountyPDO Capital,DNAExoneration,Felony,

Misdemeanor,Juvenile,Padilla

Consultation&referrals,CPS&

FamilyLaw,Appeals,MentalHealth

1983 Dallas

ColoradoCountyPublic

Defender

Felony,Misdemeanor,Juvenile 1987 Colorado

ElPasoCountyPDO Capital,Felony,Misdemeanor,

Juvenile

1987 ElPaso

WebbCountyPDO Felony,Misdemeanor,Juvenile 1988 Webb

WichitaCountyPDO Felony,Misdemeanor 1989 Wichita

CameronCounty

JuvenilePDO

Juvenile 1999 Cameron

BexarCountyPublic

Defender

FelonyAppellate,Misdemeanor

Appellate,JuvenileAppellate,

MisdemeanorMentalHealth,Felony

MentalHealth

2005 Bexar

HidalgoCountyPDO Felony,Misdemeanor,Juvenile 2005 Hidalgo

KaufmanCounty Felony,Misdemeanor 2007 Kaufman

TravisCountyMHPDO MisdemeanorMentalHealth 2007 Travis

BowieCountyPDO Felony,Misdemeanor 2008 Bowie

RegionalPublic

DefenderOfficefor

CapitalCases

Capital 2008 177counties

BeeCountyRegional

PDO

Felony,Misdemeanor,Juvenile,

Appellate

2009

Bee,LiveOak,

McMullen,Refugio,

Willacy

FortBendCountyPDO Felony,Misdemeanor,FelonyMental

Health,MisdemeanorMentalHealth

2010 FortBend

CaprockRegionalPDO Felony,Misdemeanor,Juvenile,

Appellate

2011 Briscoe,Cochran,

Dickens,Floyd,

Hockley,Kent,

Motley,Stonewall,

Swisher

HarrisCountyPDO Felony,Juvenile,FelonyAppellate,

MisdemeanorAppellate,

MisdemeanorMentalHealth

2011 Harris

BurnetCountyPDO Felony,Misdemeanor,Juvenile 2012 Burnet

StarrCountyRegional

PDO

Felony,Misdemeanor,Juvenile,

Appellate

2016 Starr,Duval,Jim

Hogg

FarWestTexasRegional

PDO

Felony,Misdemeanor 2018 Brewster,Culberson,

Hudspeth,JeffDavis,

Presidio



4



Table2:ManagedAssignedCounselPrograms‐2018

ProgramName ServicesOffered

Year

Established

ParticipatingCounties

LubbockPrivate

DefenderOffice

Felony,Misdemeanor,Felony

MentalHealth,Misdemeanor

MentalHealth

2009 Lubbock

CollinCountyMental

HealthManaged

CounselProgram

FelonyMentalHealth,

MisdemeanorMentalHealth

2013 Collin

CapitalAreaPrivate

DefenderService

Felony,Misdemeanor,Felony

MentalHealth,Misdemeanor

MentalHealth

2014 Travis



Itisdifficulttoestablishdirect,causalevidencewithoutrigorousexperimentaldesignontheimpacton

qualityofindigentdefenseandthecost‐effectivenessofpublicdefenderandmanagedassignedcounsel

programsduetotheinabilitytoobservecountiesoperatingapublicdefender(ormanagedassigned

counsel)programwithouttheexistenceofsuchservices.

Nevertheless,itispossibletoexaminethe

experienceofcurrentstandingoffices.EveryTexascountysubmitsdataonthenumberandcostsof

indigentrepresentationthroughanannualIndigentDefenseExpenditureReportcollectedbytheTexas

IndigentDefenseCommission.Thisdatabase,combinedwithself‐reportedinformationaboutlocal

policiesandpracticesfromestablishedpublicdefenderandmanagedcounseloffices,provideuseful

resourcesforexploringtheefficacyofsuchsystemsrelativetootherformsofassignedcounsel.

Publicdefenderofficesprovidebudgetpredictability,uniformrepresentation,andinstitutional

infrastructure.Theinfrastructureprovidedbypublicdefenderofficesincludeongoingprofessional

development,establishedqualitystandards,improvedaccesstoinvestigators,andclosemonitoringof

attorneys.Inpublicdefenderoffices,caseloadcriteriaandotherqualityassurancemeasuresare

developedandrefinedovertime,creatingestablishedperformancestandards.Clearguidelineshelp

ensurebothconsistencyandqualityoflegaldefense.Thechiefpublicdefenderalsoprovidesoversight

andguidanceforattorneysandcanmonitorperformancetoensurecompliancewithstandards.Witha

criticalmassofcriminaldefenseattorneysoperatinginasingleoffice,continuinglegaleducation

workshopscanbeofferedin‐houseontopicspertinenttolocalpriorities.Othertrainingopportunities

includementoringforjuniordefendersintheofficeandthecourtroom,aswellasinformalgroup

planningandbrainstormingexercisestoimprovedepartmentaloperations.Finally,thelargervolumeof

casesprocessedinpublicdefenderofficesmakesitmorefeasibletoprovidein‐houseaccesstokey

resources,suchasinvestigatorsandprofessionalexperts.

ArelativelynewtypeofcounselsysteminTexasistheMAC.TheMACissimilartothepublicdefender

model,buttheattorneysarenotemployeesofthecountyandareprivatecontractors.TheMAC

employsamanagingattorneytomonitorattorneysandareviewcommitteecanalsobeusedtoselect

attorneystoparticipateintheMAC.OverallbenefitsoftheMACsystemincludeindependence,

oversight,efficiency,reliability,compliance,andtraining.

TheMACcanalsoprovideaccountabilityfor

attorneysbymonitoringcaseloadsandcomplaintstoensurequalityrepresentation.



Descriptivestudieshaveshownthepositiveimpactsofpublicdefenderandmanagedassignedcounselprograms.

TexasIndigentDefenseCommission,PrimeronManagedAssignedCounselPrograms,2017.



5



American Bar Association’s Ten Principles of a Public Defense Delivery System

TheAmericanBarAssociation(ABA)publishedtheTenPrinciplesofaPublicDefenseDeliverySystemin

2002.

Theseprincipleswereestablishedinordertoprovideguidancetogovernmentofficialstocreate

aneffectiveandqualitysystemtodeliverrepresentationtoindigentdefendants.TheABAprinciples

include:

1. Thepublicdefensefunction,includingtheselection,funding,andpaymentofdefensecounsel,

isindependent.

2. Wherethecaseloadissufficientlyhigh,thepublicdefensedeliverysystemsconsistsofbotha

defenderofficeandtheactiveparticipationoftheprivatebar.

3. Clientsarescreenedforeligibility,anddefensecounselisassignedandnotifiedofappointment,

assoonasfeasibleafterclients’arrest,detention,orrequestforcounsel.

4. Defensecounselisprovidedsufficienttimeandaconfidentialspacewithinwhichtomeetwith

theclient.

5. Defensecounsel’sworkloadiscontrolledtopermittherenderingofqualityrepresentation.

6. Defensecounsel’sability,training,andexperiencematchthecomplexityofthecase.

7. Thesameattorneycontinuouslyrepresentstheclientuntilcompletionofthecase.

8. Thereisparitybetweendefensecounselandtheprosecutionwithrespecttoresourcesand

defensecounselisincludedasanequalpartnerinthejusticesystem.

9. Defensecounselisprovidedwithandrequiredtoattendcontinuinglegaleducation.

10. Defensecounselissupervisedandsystematicallyreviewedforqualityandefficiencyaccording

tonationallyandlocallyadoptedstandards.



Indigentdefenseoverallisatopicrelevanttomanystatesduetolawsuitsbeingfiledtocreatechangein

indigentdefensesystems.ClassactionlawsuitshavefocusedonspecificissuesestablishedintheABA

TenPrinciples,suchasexcessiveattorneycaseloads,insufficientattorneycompensation,alackof

attorneyhiring,trainingstandards,pretrialbondpractices,ortheabsenceofoversightmechanisms.

Texascountieshavealreadybeensued,includingGillespie,Williamson,Dallas,Galveston,andHarris.

Theselawsuitshavebeenusedtoachievereforminindigentdefensesystemsandarebecomingmore

commonacrosstheUnitedStates.Giventheseevents,itisimportanttoexaminequalityrepresentation

withinBexarCounty’sindigentdefensesystem.





AmericanBarAssociation,“TenPrinciplesofaPublicDefenseDeliverySystem,”February2002.TheStateBarof

Texasalsohascomprehensiveguidelines.SeealsoStateBarofTexas,“PerformanceGuidelinesforNon‐Capital

CriminalDefenseRepresentation,”January2011,

https://www.texasbar.com/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Texas_Bar_Journal&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&

ContentID=14703



6



BexarCountyIndigentDefenseSystem

BexarCountyisthe4

largestcountyinTexas,witha2018populationestimateof1,932,383.

Bexar

Countyhas10criminaldistrictcourtsand15countycourts.Thecountyhasadistrictcourtandcounty

courtindigentdefenseplan.

BexarCountyalsohasseveralspecialtycourts.BexarCountycurrentlyhas

acourt‐appointedattorneywheelsystemandaPublicDefenderOfficetorepresentindigentclients.The

PublicDefenderOfficeismadeupofthefollowingdivisions:appellate,misdemeanorandfelonymental

health,mentalhealthcivil,misdemeanortrial(onlyoperatesincourtswherejudgeselecttohavethe

PublicDefender)andmagistration.ThecurrentstudyfocusedonBexarCounty’sadultindigentdefense

system.

InAugust2010,theTaskForceonIndigentDefense,nowknownastheTexasIndigentDefense

Commission,publisheda“ReviewofBexarCounty’sIndigentDefenseSystems,”afullassessmentofthe

indigentdefensesysteminthecounty.Thisreportfoundissueswithtimelyappointmentofcounseland

appointmentproceduresdeviatingfromtheapprovedindigentdefenseplan.

Afollow‐upvisittoBexar

Countyin2012showedmanyoftheissuesfoundin2010hadbeenresolvedandwereincompliance

withTIDCrecommendationsfromthe2010review.

BexarCountyisoneoftheleadersinthestatebyprovidingcounselatmagistration.Onlyfour(Bexar,

Cameron,FortBend,andHarris)countiesoutof254offercounselatmagistration(alsoknownasfirst

appearance).TheBexarCountyPublicDefenderOfficerepresentsdefendantsatmagistration.According

totheTexasIndigentDefenseCommission’sinnovationbrief

,a150%increaseoccurredindefendants

releasedonpersonalbonds.Additionally,mentalhealthpersonalbondsincreased20%inclients

representedbytheBexarCountyPublicDefenderOffice.

ComparisonoftheBexarCountyIndigentDefenseSystemtoPeerCounties

ThelargestcountiesinTexasareleadersininnovativepracticesforindigentdefensesystems.As

previouslymentioned,BexarCountyiscurrentlyoneoftheleadersinthestatebyprovidingcounselat

magistrationandhavingmultiplespecialtycourts.ThecountyhasaRemoteAttorneyVisitation(RAV)

systemandavoucherrecommendationcommittee,whicharebothinnovativeandpromisingpractices.

Eachoftheseinnovationswillbediscussedinlaterchapters.

HarrisCountyisaleaderinthestatebyalsoprovidingcounselatmagistration.HarrisCountyisinthe

processofimplementingaMACofficewithsupportfromaTIDCgrantandhasapublicdefenderoffice

whichhandlesmisdemeanor,felony,juvenile,andappellatecases.TravisCountyisalsointheprocessof

implementingacounty‐widepublicdefenderofficewithsupportfromaTIDCgrant.DallasCountyalso

hasapublicdefenderoffice,whichrepresentsmisdemeanor,felony,juvenile,andappellatecases.



SeeTexasIndigentDefenseCommission,IndigentDefenseDataforTexas,availableat

http://tidc.tamu.edu/public.net/Reports/ExpenditureReportResults.aspx

NotlaterthanNovember1ofeachodd‐numberedyear,everycountyismandatedbytheTexasLegislatureto

submittotheTexasIndigentDefenseCommission(TIDC):(1)acopyofitscountywideindigentplan(s)and

proceduresandanyrevisionstotheplanorformspreviouslysubmitted;or(2)averificationthattheplanand

formspreviouslysubmittedstillremainineffect.Theseinstructionsgovernthesubmissionoftheplansduetobe

submittedtotheTIDC,pursuanttoSection79.036oftheTexasGovernmentCode.BexarCounty’sindigent

defenseplansareshowninAppendixA.

Supranote3.

TexasIndigentDefenseCommission,IndigentDefenseInnovation,2018.



7



TarrantCountyhasanappointmentwheel,butthecountycurrentlyutilizesTechShareasadata

managementsoftware.ThissystemhasbeenimplementedbyseveralcountiesinTexas.Specifically,this

systemhasanindigentdefenseapplication,whichwasdevelopedincooperationwithTIDC.Thelargest

countiesinTexaswiththeexceptionofBexarhaveindigentdefensecoordinators.Indigentdefense

coordinators,oneofthefirstinnovationsrecommendedaftertheCommissionwasestablished,now

ensurepromptappointmentofqualifiedcounselin97counties.Eighty‐threepercentofcountieswith

populationexceeding300,000havecreatedthisposition.

AllofthelargecountiesinTexashave

developedandareutilizinginnovativepractices,andBexarCountyhasseveralpromisingpracticesthat

othercountiescouldbenefitfromutilizing.

Per‐Case Spending

TIDCtracksindigentdefenseexpendituresandthenumberofcaseseachcountyreports.TIDCalso

requirescountiestoprovidetheirfeeschedulesforattorneypayments.

Tables3and4displayBexar

CountyindigentdefensespendingincomparisonwithotherlargecountiesinTexas.InFiscalYear2019,

BexarCountyspent$15,088,968on42,376indigentdefensecases.

BexarCountyspendstheleast

amountofmoneypercaseat$356.

Table3:LargestTexasCounties’IndigentDefenseExpenditures&CasesinFY2019



County

Current

Year

Population

Estimate

(2018)

Total

Indigent

Defense

Expenditures

Total

Countof

Indigent

Defense

Cases

Average

Costof

Indigent

Defense

Case

Juvenile

Trial‐

Level

Cases

Paid

Misdemeanor

Trial‐Level

CasesPaid

Non‐Capital

Felony

Trial‐Level

CasesPaid

Capital

Murder

Cases

Paid

Bexar 1,932,383 $15,088,968 42,376 $356 2,186 22,194 17,751 79

Dallas 2,615,995 $37,533,215 54,467 $689 7,307 24,294 22,568 74

Harris 4,582,398 $55,299,196 62,123 $890 6,139 19,658 35,842 134

Tarrant 1,995,921 $21,602,871 33,009 $654 1,640 15,333 15,644 116

Travis 1,206,427 $14,555,636 29,474 $494 2,662 14,950 11,710 26

 



Seehttp://tidc.tamu.edu/Public.Net/

ThefeeschedulesforthelargestcountiesareincludedinAppendixB.Allcountyindigentdefenseplansand

relateddocumentsareavailableathttp://tidc.tamu.edu/public.net/Reports/IDPlanNarrative.aspx

TexasIndigentDefenseCommissionExpenditureReports,BexarCountyFY2019,availableat

http://tidc.tamu.edu/public.net/Reports/ExpenditureReportResults.aspx

Tabledoesnotincludecasesrepresentedatmagistration.Appellatecasesandcostsareincludedintotal

expensesandcasecounts.Thesecasescountsareavailableonline.SeeTexasIndigentDefenseCommission

ExpenditureReports,availableathttp://tidc.tamu.edu/public.net/Reports/ExpenditureReportResults.aspx



8



Table4:LargestTexasCounties’Investigation&ExpertExpendituresinFY2019



County InvestigationExpenditures ExpertExpenditures

Bexar $496,033 $474,658

Dallas $984,019 $1,099,095

Harris $2,031,332 $1,067,764

Tarrant $472,526 $995,202

Travis $220,749 $578,610

Caseload Comparison

TIDCalsocollectsdataconcerningattorneycaseloads,allowingcomparisonsofappointedattorney

workloadsacrosscounties.

Figure1presentstheaverageattorneycaseloadbythelargestcounties

overyears.AttorneysinBexarCountyrepresenttheleastamountofindigentdefensecases,onaverage,

comparedtoattorneysinHarris,Travis,Dallas,andTarrantacrossallyears.However,thefiguresinthis

sectiononlydisplayindigentdefensecaseloads.Thesecalculationsdonotincluderetainedcasesor

casesrepresentedoutofcounty.



Figure1





Publicdefenderexpendituresareexcluded.AppendixCpresentsinvestigationandexpertexpendituresbycase

type.

Seehttp://tidc.tamu.edu/public.net/Reports/AttorneyCaseLoad.aspx

Thissectionexcludespublicdefenders.



9



Casesarebrokendownintojuvenilecases,felonycases,andmisdemeanorcases.Theaverageattorney

juvenile,misdemeanor,andfelonycaseloadsbycountyoveryearsisrepresentedinFigures2,3,and4,

respectively.AttorneysinBexarCountyrepresenttheleastamountofjuvenile,misdemeanor,and

felonycases,onaverage,acrossallyears.JuvenilecaseloadsinBexarCountymostcloselyresemble

thoseinTarrantCounty.Theaveragejuvenilecaseloadforattorneysoverthesixyearsis4.3forBexar

Countyand5.6forTarrantCounty.MisdemeanorcaseloadsinTarrantandDallasCountyaresimilarto

thoseinBexarCounty.TheaveragemisdemeanorcaseloadforattorneysoverthesixyearsforBexar

County,TarrantCounty,andDallasCountyis38.6,42.1,and45.3,respectively.Felonycaseloadsin

BexarCountyaresignificantlylowerthancaseloadsinallothercountieseachyear.However,thisdoes

nottakeintoaccountretainedcasesorappointmentsinsurroundingcounties.

Figure2



 



10



Figure3



Figure4



11



Figure5displaystheaverageattorneytotalcaseloadpayment.BexarCounty’saveragetotalpaymentis

lowerthantheotherlargestcountiesacrosstime.AppendixBpresentsthecurrentfeeschedulesofthe

largestcountiesfromtheirindigentdefenseplans.

Figure5



Figure6displaysthepercentageofoverburdenedattorneysbycounty,acrossyears.

“Overburdened”

isdefinedasanattorneywhowaspaidformorecases(felony,misdemeanor,andappellate)inayear

thanTIDC’ssuggestedcaseloadguidelines(ashighlightedbyCarmichaeletal.,2015).

Texas’Weighted

CaseloadStudy

foundthatforthedeliveryofreasonablycompetentandeffectiverepresentation,

attorneysshouldcarryanannualfull‐timeequivalentcaseloadofnomorethanthefollowing:

 236ClassBMisdemeanors

 216ClassAMisdemeanors

 174StateJailFelonies

 144ThirdDegreeFelonies

 105SecondDegreeFelonies

 77FirstDegreeFelonies

ThenumberofoverburdenedattorneysinBexarCountyislessthanthenumberofoverburdened

attorneysinallothercounties,acrossyears.However,thepercentageofoverburdenedattorneysin



Attorneycaseloadswerecalculatedwithincounties.Acrosscountyresultsweresimilar.

DottieCarmichael,AustinClemens,HeatherCaspers,MinerMarchbanks,III,SteveWood,“Guidelinesfor

IndigentDefenseCaseloads,”AReportfortheTexasIndigentDefenseCommission,January2015.

Supranote24.



12



BexarCountyhasincreasedovertime,from2.6%in2014to9.5%in2019.Thissteadyincreaseshould

bemonitoredcloselytoensureattorneysdonotbecomefurtheroverburdened.Onceagain,the

caseloadsreportedinthissectiononlyincludeindigentdefensecases,notretainedcases.

Figure6



Court‐Appointed Attorney Requirements

AllcountiesinTexashaveminimumattorneyqualificationsspecifiedintheirindigentdefenseplansin

orderforattorneystoapplytorepresentcourt‐appointedcases.AppendixDprovidestheminimum

attorneyrequirementssection(asspecifiedinindigentdefenseplans)ofthelargestcountiestoapply

andremainonthecourtappointmentwheel.Comparingrequirementsforapplyingtobeonthe

appointmentwheelacrossthelargestcounties,onlyHarrisCountyutilizesacertificationtest.Bexar

County’srequirementsforapplyingtothecourtappointmentwheelareslightlylowerwithlesstrial

experiencerequired.BexarCountycouldincreasethetrialexperiencerequiredforattorneystoapplyfor

theappointmentwheel.TarrantCountyspecifiesthatattorneystakingStateJailFelonycasesare



13



requiredtobelicensedforoneyearandparticipateinfivejurytrialspriortoapplyingforcourt

appointments.BexarCountyrequiresone‐yearpriorexperienceincriminallitigationandparticipationin

atleastthreecriminaljurytrialsforStateJailFelonycases.Formisdemeanorappointments,thelargest

counties(exceptforBexarCounty)requireattorneystobelicensedforoneyearpriortoapplyingto

representcourt‐appointedcases.However,TravisCountyoffersattorneystheabilitytoqualifyforthe

misdemeanorappointmentwheelafterthesuccessfulcompletionoftheCapitalAreaPrivateDefender

Service(CAPDS)mentorshipprogram.Thisprogramallowsattorneystogainexperienceandstillreceive

supervisionandmentoring.BexarCountycouldimplementasimilarmentorshipprogramforattorneys.

BexarCountyisbehindTarrantCountyintheircontinuinglegaleducationrequirementsforattorneysto

remainonthecourtappointmentwheel.TarrantCountyrequires15hoursofCLEsannuallyforfelony

cases,andBexarCountyrequires12hoursannually.

Intermsoffinancialimplicationsfornewappointmentandcontinuingeducationandtesting

requirements,morestringentrequirementscouldreducethenumberofattorneysbecausetheycannot

completetheseadditionalrequirements.Thiscouldleadtobetterqualityattorneystakingcourt‐

appointedcasesinthecounty.Giventhiscontext,PPRIconductedacomprehensiveevaluationofBexar

County’sindigentdefensesystem.

OrganizationoftheReport

ThereportisorganizedwithChapter2explainingthemethodologyofthestudyandChapters3and4

coveringqualityofserviceandrepresentation,respectively.Chapter5coversoutcomemeasuresby

differenttypesofrepresentation.Chapter6examinestheBexarCountyPublicDefenderOffice.Chapter

7containsanevaluationofjudicialpractices.Chapter8presentsstudyrecommendations.







14



Methodology

ThePublicPolicyResearchInstituteatTexasA&MUniversityusedamulti‐methodapproachtoexamine

BexarCounty’sindigentdefensesystem.Quantitativeandqualitativemethodswerebothutilizedinthe

currentstudy.Severaldatasourceswereusedandanalyzedtoprovideacomprehensiveevaluation.

QuantitativeData

TheBexarCountyOfficeofCriminalJusticePolicy,Planning,andProgramsprovidedadatadownloadof

disposedadultcriminalcasesfromtheCriminalJusticeInformationSystems(CJIS)Databasefrom

January2016toApril2019.Thesampleincluded90,049uniquejudicialnumbers(54,936as

misdemeanorsand35,113asfelonies)ofalldisposedcasesduringthattimeframe.Forthepurposeof

thisreport,thedatawastrimmedtoincludecaseswithafirstrelatedbookingnoearlierthanJanuary1,

1990.Adefendantcangetbookedononejudicialnumberormultiplejudicialnumbers.Inthisreport,a

judicialnumberisauniquecase.Hence,abookingwiththreejudicialnumbersonthesamedayforthe

samedefendantisconsideredabookingwiththreedifferentcases.Thisbroughtalevelofcomplexityin

identifyingspecificparametersforthestudy.Forinstance,whilethemajorityofsinglebookingswith

multiplecasesarebundledtogetherunderthehighestcharge,manycasestakeuniquepathsincluding

differentattorneys,dispositions,andoveralltimeline.Throughoutthereport,adifferentanalysissample

wascreatedtobestexaminethespecificoutcomeinquestion.ThedatafromtheCJISDatabaseallows

theresearchteamtoanalyzetypeofattorney,timelines,outcomes,andotherimportantcaserelated

information.Thedatabaseincludedallcourteventsassociatedwitheachcase.Whilecourteventsare

basedoneventqualifiersrepresentedbyspecificcodeevents,manyeventsusethesamecodeandare

intextformmakingitextremelydifficulttodisentangleaccuratecaseinformation.

PPRIalsoutilizedindigentdefenseexpenditurereportdataandattorneycaseloaddatafromtheTIDC.



Theexpenditurereportandattorneycaseloaddataareyearlycountyleveldata.Finally,theresearch

teamalsocollecteddataonattorneydemographicsfromtheStateBarofTexas.

QualitativeData

PPRIattemptedtogatherperspectivesofstakeholderswhoareinvolvedintheindigentdefensesystem

inBexarCounty.Qualitativemethodsincluded:

 In‐depthinterviewswithcountyofficials,judges,andattorneys

 Surveyofdefendantswithdisposedcases



Interviews

PPRIemailedandcalledjudgesandattorneystoinformthemaboutthestudyandaskfortheir

participation.PPRIreceivedcontactinformationforjudgesandcountyofficialsfromtheBexarCounty

OfficeofCriminalJusticePolicy,Planning,andProgramsandattorneysfromthedistrictandcounty

courtadministration.PPRIcontacted27judgesand234attorneyswithrequestforinterviews.

Interviewswereconductedbothin‐personandoverthetelephone.PPRIinterviewed19countyofficials,

11judges,and43attorneys.Open‐endedinterviewquestionsacrossallintervieweesfocusedonthe

followingthemes:

 Qualityrepresentation(keyattributes)



Seehttp://tidc.tamu.edu/Public.Net/



15



 Mentalhealth&opioidissues

 Recommendationsforimprovingtheindigentdefensesystem

Additionally,eachintervieweegroupwasaskedspecificquestionsabouttheirposition.Judgeswere

askedaboutmorale,vouchers,complaintsanddisciplineconcerningcourt‐appointedcounsel,their

viewsonattorneycompensation,andattorneycaseloads.Attorneyswereaskedquestionsaboutthe

attorneyselectionprocess,attorneycompensation,andjudicialpractices.Countyofficialswereasked

abouttheirmoraleandcomplaintsagainstattorneys.

PPRIvisitedBexarCountyonthreesitevisitsinthefallof2019andspringof2020tointerviewcounty

officials,judges,attorneys,andsurveydefendants.PPRIstaffalsoobserveddistrictcourthearings

handlingdocketwork.

Defendant Survey

UsingthedatadownloadfromBexarCounty,PPRIextractedSIDnumbersfromarandomsample.PPRI

wasabletomatchaddressestophonenumbersandusethesenumberstoreachdefendantswhohad

nopendingoractivecaseinBexarCounty.Usingitssurveylabcallingcenter,PPRIcontacteddefendants

abouttheirexperienceswiththeBexarCountyindigentdefensesystem.Usingthosephonenumbers,

thesurveylabwasabletocomplete102surveys.

PPRIalsotraveledtoBexarCountytosurveydefendantsattheprobationdepartment.Defendantsin

waitingareaswithnopendingcaseswereapproachedaboutthesurveyandaskediftheywouldliketo

participate.Defendantswereaskedabouttheirexperienceswithcourt‐appointedattorneys.Questions

onthesurveyincludedattorney‐clientcontactandperceptionsoftreatmentinBexarCounty.The

researchteamwasabletocomplete95surveys.Noidentifyinginformationondefendants'

demographics,northeirspecificcase,attorney,orcourtwascollected.

 



16



QualityofService

LocaljurisdictionsarerequiredbytheFairDefenseActof2001toprovidelegalcounseltodefendants

whocannotaffordanattorney,

withtheimportantcaveatthatthisrepresentationoughttomeet

constitutionalandethicalobligationstotheclient.PPRIexaminedthetimelineswithinBexarCounty’s

indigentdefensesystem,includingmagistrationandappointmentofcounsel.

BexarCountyTimelines

BexarCountyhasacentralmagistrationfacilitywheredefendantsaremagistrated.PretrialService

officersareresponsibleforconductingriskassessmentswithdefendantspreandpostmagistration.

PretrialServiceofficersalsoinitiatethereviewprocesstoappointcounselifdefendantsrequestacourt‐

appointedattorney.

StatutoryRequirements

ThestatutorytimelinesgoverningtheappointmentofindigentdefensecounselareshowninFigure3‐1.

Within48hoursofarrest,theaccusedmustbebroughtbeforeamagistrate.

AttheArticle15.17

hearing(magistration),theaccusedmustbeinformedoftheirrightsandtheproceduresforrequesting

counsel.Judgesmustruleonrequestsforcounselandappointcounselwithinoneworkingdayof

receivingrequestsincountieswithpopulationof250,000ormore.



Figure3‐1:StatutoryTimelinesRequiredbyFairDefenseAct



ABAPrinciples&Standards

TheABATenPrinciplesofaPublicDefenseDeliverySystem

statesinitsthirdprinciplethat:

3.Clientsarescreenedforeligibility,anddefensecounselisassignedandnotifiedof

appointment,assoonasfeasibleafterclients’arrest,detention,orrequestforcounsel.





GideonvWainwright,372U.S.335(1963)appliedtherighttocounseltofelonies;however,theSupremeCourt

laterextendedthisrighttomisdemeanorandjuvenilecasesinArgersingerv.Hamlin,407U.S.25,40(1972)andIn

reGault,387U.S.1(1967),respectively.

TexasCodeofCriminalProcedure14.06

TexasCCP1.051

Supranote11.



17



TheABA’sPretrialReleaseStandard

10‐4.1statesthat:

“Unlessthedefendantisreleasedoncitationorinsomeotherlawfulmanner,thedefendant

shouldbetakenbeforeajudicialofficerwithoutunnecessarydelay.Thedefendantshouldbe

presentedatthenextjudicialsessionwithin[sixhours]afterarrest.Injurisdictionswherethisis

notpossible,thedefendantshouldinnoinstancebeheldbypolicelongerthan24hours

withoutappearingbeforeajudicialofficer.Judicialofficersshouldbereadilyavailableto

conductfirstappearanceswithinthetimelimitsestablishedbythisStandard.

Whereacrimeofviolenceisimplicated,anassessmentoftheriskposedbythedefendantto

thevictim(s)andcommunityshouldbecompletedpriortothefirstappearance;buta

defendant'sfirstappearanceshouldnotordinarilybedelayedinordertoconductin‐custody

interrogationorotherin‐custodyinvestigation.Adefendantwhoisnotpromptlypresented

shouldbeentitledtoimmediatereleaseunderappropriateconditionsunlesspretrialdetention

isorderedasprovidedinStandards10‐5.8through10‐5.10.”

BexarCountyIndigentDefensePlan

BexarCounty’sindigentdefenseplanstatesthatthearrestedpersonwillbebroughtbeforeamagistrate

within48hoursofarrest.Additionally,theplanstatesthatcounselwillbeappointednolaterthanthe

endofthefirstworkingdayafterthedatetherequestwasreceived.



BexarCountyCurrentPractice

PPRIexaminedquantitativedataofdisposedcasesinBexarCountytoassesstimelinesregarding

appointmentofcounsel.Toexaminecasetimelines,thesampleisrestrictedtoincludeonlycaseswhere

thefirstattorneyassignedtothecasewascourt‐appointed.

Figure3‐2andFigure3‐3displaytimelines

forarresttomagistration,magistrationtoattorneyappointment,andattorneyappointmentto

dispositionformisdemeanorandfelonycases,respectively.Theaveragenumberofdaysbetweenarrest

andmagistrationislessthanadayforbothtypesofcases.





ABAPretrialReleaseStandards

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/publications/criminal_justice_section_archive/crimjust_sta

ndards_pretrialrelease_blk/#10‐5.1

SeeAppendixA.

Thesampledoesnotincludecaseswherethefirstattorneyappointedwasapublicdefenderordefendant

retainedcounsel.Thesamplealsoexcludescasesthatneverhadanattorney.



18



Figure3‐2:BexarCountyMisdemeanorTimeline



19



Figure3‐3:BexarCountyFelonyTimeline



Afterdefendantsaremagistrated,theymaybereleasedbeforebeingappointedanattorney.Thisisthe

casefor30%ofmisdemeanorcasesand20%offelonycases.Whendefendantsarereleasedbefore

beingappointedanattorney,theywilltypicallybeappointedanattorneyattheirfirsthearing,which

significantlyincreasesthenumberofdaysbetweenmagistrationandattorneyappointment.

The

averagenumberofdaysbetweenmagistrationandattorneyappointmentforthosedefendantsnot

releasedis2.5and5.3formisdemeanorandfelonycases,respectively.Forbothmisdemeanorand

felonycases,theaveragenumberofdaysbetweenattorneyappointmentanddispositionislargerfor

casesthatwerereleasedbeforebeingassignedanattorney.Theaveragenumberofdaysforthe

releasedcasesis32.2moredaysthanthe109.1‐dayaverageforcasesnotreleasedformisdemeanors

and28daysmorethanthe160.3‐dayaverageforcasesnotreleasedforfelonies.Theaveragenumberof

daysbetweenarrestanddispositionformisdemeanorsis129.6and179.8forfelonies.



TexasCodeofCriminalProcedure1.051(j)states,“Notwithstandinganyotherprovisionofthissection,ifan

indigentdefendantisreleasedfromcustodypriortotheappointmentofcounselunderthissection,appointment

ofcounselisnotrequireduntilthedefendant'sfirstcourtappearanceorwhenadversarialjudicialproceedingsare

initiated,whichevercomesfirst.”Rothgeryv.GillespieCounty,554US191(2008)held,“Acriminaldefendant's

initialappearancebeforeamagistrate,wherehelearnsthechargeagainsthimandhislibertyissubjectto

restriction,markstheinitiationofadversaryjudicialproceedingsthattriggerattachmentoftheSixthAmendment

righttocounsel.Attachmentdoesnotalsorequirethataprosecutor(asdistinctfromapoliceofficer)beawareof

thatinitialproceedingorinvolvedinitsconduct.”



20



Article17.03allowsdefendantstobereleasedonpersonalbond.

Additionally,theABAStandards

surroundingpretrialreleasestate“thelawfavorsthereleaseofdefendantspendingadjudicationof

charges.”

BexarCounty’sindigentdefenseplanalsostatesthatpersonalbondscanbeutilizedto

releasedefendants.Table3‐1showsadditionaltimelinesformisdemeanorsandfelonies.Most

defendantsarebeingreleasedfromcustodywithin10daysformisdemeanorsand50daysforfelonies.



Table3‐1:BexarCountyTimeSpentinCustodybyMisdemeanorsandFelonies

 Misdemeanor Felony

AverageNumberofDaysSpent

inCustody

9.4days(SD=28.4) 46.9days(SD=84.5)

Acomplicationoftheanalysisoftimebetweenrequestforcounselandappointmentofacourt‐

appointedattorneyisthedateofrequestforacourt‐appointedattorneyisnotcurrentlyrecorded

electronically.Pretrialservicesutilizesaseparatesystemtorecorddata.Thissystemrecordsthedateof

aninterviewconcerningfinancialresources,butnotthespecificrequestforattorneydate.Theactual

requestdateforappointmentofcounselisnotrecordedwithintheCJISdatabase.Freetextentry

referencesforrequestforcounselwerefound.However,theywerenotconsistentthroughoutthedata,

andaspecificeventcodedidnotexistmakingitimpossibletoknowwithcertaintythedate.Thecounty

sharedadatadownloadfromthepretrialservicesystem,butmergingthenewinformationwiththeCJIS

databasewasnotpossibleduetomissingkeyelementssuchascasenumber.

Recommendations

BexarCountyiscurrentlyincompliancewithstatutoryrequirements,ABAStandards,andtheindigent

defenseplanformagistrationwithin48hoursofarrest.Inordertopreciselymeasurethetimeline

betweenrequestforcounselandappointmentofanattorney,BexarCountyneedstospecificallyrecord

therequestdate.Withthisdataelement,theprecisetimelinescanbeanalyzedandcompliancewith

statutoryrequirementscanbeassessed.





TexasCCP17.03

ABAStandardsofPretrialRelease10‐1.1‐10‐1.5

Averagedaysarecalculatedbythenumberofdaysbetweenarrestandrelease(forthosewhowerereleasedon

bond)andarresttodisposition(forthosewhowerenotreleasedonbond).Misdemeanor:n=54,930,Felony:

n=35,115



21



Attorney‐ClientContact

StatutoryRequirements

Texaslawstatesthatafterappointmentofcounselismade,counselmust“makeeveryreasonableeffort

tocontactthedefendantnotlaterthantheendofthefirstworkingdayafterthedateonwhichthe

attorneyisappointedandtointerviewthedefendantassoonaspracticableaftertheattorneyis

appointed.”



ABAStandards

ABACriminalJusticeStandardsfortheDefenseFunction4‐1.3statesthatdefenseattorneys“havea

dutytocommunicateandkeeptheclientinformedandadvisedofsignificantdevelopmentsand

potentialoptionsandoutcomes.”



BexarCountyIndigentDefensePlan

BexarCounty’sindigentdefenseplanstatesthatcounselmustmakeeveryreasonableefforttocontact

theclientwithinoneworkingdayofappointmentafterthedateonwhichtheattorneyisappointed.



Additionally,BexarCounty’sCountyCourtPlanstatesthatattorneys“shallinterviewthedefendantas

soonaspracticableaftertheattorneyisappointed;andmaintainreasonablecommunicationand

contactwiththeclientatalltimesandkeeptheclientinformedofthestatusofthecase.”Failureto

“twiceormorefailtocontactorinterviewclientsinatimelymannerasrequiredbyArticle26.04(j)(1),

CodeofCriminalProcedure,”isgroundsforremovalfromthecourtappointmentwheel.BexarCounty’s

DistrictCourtPlanstatesthat,“whenanattorneyintentionallyorrepeatedlyviolatestherequirement

thattheattorneymakeeveryreasonableefforttocontactthedefendantnotlaterthantheendofthe

firstworkingdayafterthedateonwhichtheattorneyisappointedandtointerviewthedefendantas

soonaspracticableaftertheattorneyisappointed,”thenthisviolationisgroundsforremovalfromthe

courtappointmentwheel.

BexarCountyCurrentPractice

AlthoughBexarCountydoesnotrecordthedateofinitialclientcontactinthedatamanagement

system,asampleofdefendantswereaskedabouttheappointmentprocessandwhentheywerefirst

contactedbytheirattorney.Alittlelessthanhalf(41%)ofdefendantsdidnotfeelinformedaboutthe

appointmentprocess,andTable3‐2showsalmost40%ofdefendantsmettheirattorneyattheirfirst

courthearing.Slightlylessthan10%(8.4%)ofattorneysreachedouttotheirclientsbyeitheraletteror

email.Onefifthofintervieweddefendantshadanin‐personvisitbytheirattorney.

Further,about35%ofdefendantsstatedthatittookmorethanthreedaysbeforetheirattorneyfirst

contactedthem.Additionally,40%ofdefendantsstatedtheyfeltitwashardtocontacttheirattorney,

andtheaveragenumberoftimesdefendantsstatedthattheyspokewiththeirattorneythroughout

theircasewas3.7.





TexasCCP26.04(j)

OtherABAStandardsrelatingtoattorney‐clientcontactinclude:ABAStandards,DefenseFunction4‐2.1and4‐

3.2.Seehttps://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/standards/DefenseFunctionFourthEdition/

SeeAppendixA.



22



Table3‐2:MethodofFirstContact

Question  Percent

Howdidyourattorneyfirstcontactyou?(n=191)



InCourt 39.3

In‐PersonVisit 20.4

PhoneCall 19.4

NoResponse 12.3

Letter 6.3

Email 2.1



Attorneyswerealsoaskedhowoftentheymetwiththeirclientsonaverage.WhilePPRIdidnotsurvey

attorneysforquantitativeresponsesaboutmethodsinwhichtheyusedtomeettheirclients,attorneys

didprovidesomeofthewaystheyfirstinteractedwithdefendants.Themostfrequentlymentioned

werejailvisits.Attorneysexplainedthatoncetheyreceivedtheirappointmenttheywouldarrangea

visittothejailtoseetheirclient.ForcasesfiledonorafterSeptember1,2019,appointedattorneys

couldrequestanadditional$50iftheyvisitedtheirclientatthejailorthroughtheRAV.Otherattorneys

mentionedutilizingtheRAVortalkingtotheirclientsoverthephone.TheRAVisavideoconferencing

technologywhichallowsattorneystomeetwiththeirclients.AttorneyscanscheduleatimewithBexar

CountyCourtAdministrationtoutilizethevideoequipmenttomeetwithclientswhentheirclientsarein

custody.Attorneysalsoansweredthattheytriedtoseetheirclientsbeforecourtwhilesomesaidthey

wouldmeetwiththemincourt.Finally,severalattorneyssaidtheycontacttheirclientsbyfaxorletter.

Itwasalsodiscussedthatifclientswerenotinjailsometimestheyweredifficulttolocatewitha

workingphonenumberoraccurateaddress.Attorneysindicatedthatthisproblemwasdifficultto

overcome,asitincreasedthetimeittooktocontacttheirclients.

Recommendations

InordertocomplywiththelawandABAStandards,BexarCountyneedstotrackinitialclientcontact.

DuetoBexarCounty’sindigentdefenseplanstatingthatattorneyscouldberemovedfromthe

appointmentwheelduetolackoftimelycontactwiththedefendant,initialattorney‐clientcontact

needstobeincludedasadatabasefieldwithinthenewdatamanagementsystem.Suchsystemshould

beflexibletoreflectthevarietyofwaysattorneysreachouttotheirclients,allowingthecountythe

abilitytocreatereportsbytypeofcase,attorney,methodofcontact,etc.



23



AttorneyComplaints&Discipline

StatutoryRequirements

Texasdoesnothavespecificstatutoryrequirementsregardingattorneycomplaints.

ABAStandards

TheABAdoesnothavetheauthoritytohandlecomplaintsagainstattorneys.Eachstateestablishesits

ownagencytomanagetheseissues.TheStateBarofTexashasadisciplinarysystem,whichisgoverned

byRulesofProfessionalConductandRulesofDisciplinaryProcedure.

Theserulesgovernprofessional

conductforcounselwhenrepresentingdefendants,andtherulesfordisciplinaryprocedurepresentthe

methodforfilinggrievancesagainstattorneys.

BexarCountyIndigentDefensePlan

TheBexarCounty’sindigentdefenseplandoesnotspecificallydiscusscomplaintsagainstattorneys,but

itdoesstatethatattorneyscanberemovedfromcasesifdefendantscanshowgoodcause.

BexarCountyCurrentPractice

AttorneycomplaintsarenottrackedwithinBexarCounty’sdatamanagementsystem,butcounty

stakeholderswereaskedspecificallyaboutcomplaintsconcerningcourt‐appointedattorneys.Most

judgesstatedthatdefendantscanfileagrievancewiththegrievancecommitteeattheStateBarof

Texasiftheyarehavinganissuewiththeirattorney.Countyofficialsandjudgesmentionedthatitisnot

uncommonforattorneysnottoshowupincourt.Judgesstatedthatthisisaprimaryreasonwhythey

appointanotherattorneyfromthebench.Countyofficialsclaimedmanydefendantscomplaintheyhave

notheardfromtheirattorney,andthatthishappensfairlyfrequently.Aspecificdataentrycodedoes

notexistintheBexarCountydatamanagementsystemtotrackanattorneynotshowingupforcourt.

Freetextentryisbeingusedtoindicateattorneysnotshowingupforcourtineventqualifiers,butthis

entrymethodpreventssystematicanalysis.Evenwithauniquedatacode,dataentryisnotconsistent

throughoutcreatingtremendouscomplexitiesanduncertaintyinunderstandingcourtevents.

Judgesalsodiscussedhowtheydisciplineattorneysandthereasonswhytheydisciplinethem.Judges

regularlymeettogetheranddecidewhethertoremoveanattorneyfromthewheel.Often,judgesgive

attorneysanopportunitytoappearbeforethemtoexplainthesituationbeforeremovingthemfromthe

wheel.However,mostjudgesjustremovethemfromthespecificcase,butinthecaseofmoreserious

infractions,judgeswillreferattorneystotheStateBarfordisciplinaryactions.Beforethereferral,

judgeswouldholdahearingtodiscussissues.BesidesremovalfromthewheelorreferraltotheState

Bar,otheroptionsjudgesusedtodisciplineattorneysincludeholdingattorneysincontemptorplacing

themonprobation.

Recommendations

BexarCountyshouldtrackcomplaintsaboutattorneystoensureattorneysareprovidingquality

representation.Bothdistrictandcountycourtadministrationcouldkeepinformationaboutcomplaints

againstcertainattorneys.Ifanindigentdefensecoordinatorwereemployedbythecounty,this

individualcouldalsoassistwithhandlingcomplaintsagainstattorneys.Thisinformationcouldthenbe

providedtojudgestobetterinformtheirdecision‐makingregardingattorneysonthecourtappointment



See

https://www.texasbar.com/Content/NavigationMenu/ForThePublic/ProblemswithanAttorney/GrievanceEthicsInfo

1/default.htm



24



wheel.Thisdataelementcouldreflecttimesensitiveinformationinwhichthecourtneedstobeaware

of,hencethecountyshouldconsiderthebestwaystotrackdefendantcomplaintsinanaccurate,

secure,andtimelymanner.

In2019,BexarCountysubmittedanimprovementgrantapplicationtoTIDCtoimplementanindigent

defenseattorneymonitoringprograminthefelonycourts.Thisprogramwouldimplementareview

committeemadeupofSanAntonioCriminalDefenseLawyers,amanagingattorney,aninvestigator,

andanadministrativeassistant.Theprogramwouldreviewcomplaintsaboutattorneysfromdefendants

andprovidecontinuinglegaleducationseminars.Whilethiskindofprogramwouldaddresssomeofthe

issuesregardingattorneycomplaintsanddysfunctionthatareoccurringwithintheindigentdefense

system,amorerobustmanagedassignedcounselprogramwouldmorecomprehensivelyaddressthese

andotherissuesidentified.

BailReduction

StatutoryRequirements

Texasstatuteallowsforbondreductionswithincertainparameters.Ameasureofqualityserviceis

attorneysfilingforabailreductionorapersonalbondonfelonycasesonceadefendanthasserved90

daysincustodywithoutindictment.

Atthistime,defendantsareentitledtoapersonalbondorabail

reduction.

ABAStandards

TheABACriminalJusticeStandardsfortheDefenseFunction4‐3.2statesthat,“ineverycasewherethe

clientisdetained,defensecounselshoulddiscusswiththeclient,aspromptlyaspossible,theclient’s

custodialorreleasestatusanddeterminewhetherrelease,achangeinreleaseconditions,orless

restrictivecustodialconditions,shouldbesought.Counselshouldbeawareofapplicablestatutesand

rules,andallalternativeslessrestrictivethanfullinstitutionaldetention.”



BexarCountyIndigentDefensePlan

BexarCounty’sindigentdefenseplandoesnotstipulateanyrequirementsforattorneystofilebail

reductionsinthissituation.

BexarCountyCurrentPractice

Figure3‐4showsthefrequencyofwhichcourt‐appointedattorneyssecurebailreductionsforcasesthat

areeligible.Defendantsareconsideredeligibleforbailreductionsandreleaseiftheyhavebeen

incarceratedmorethan90dayswithoutindictment.

Only4%ofcasesinthesampleareeligibleforbail

reduction.Ofthe2,214caseseligibleforbailreductions,97%donotreceiveareduction.Thisdata

indicatesthatoftheeligiblecases,attorneysarenotfilingmotionsforabailreduction.





TexasCCP17.151

Seehttps://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/standards/DefenseFunctionFourthEdition/

Duetodatalimitations,releaseonpersonalbondforthismetriccouldnotbeexamined.



25



Figure3‐4:BailReduction



Recommendations

TexasstatuteandABAStandardsprovidefordefendantstobereleasedifthestateisnotreadyto

proceedtotrialandadefendantisstillincustody.Ifatrackingmetriccouldbeplacedonadefendant’s

case,thiscouldhelpcourtcoordinatorstotrackthisinformationforthecasesthatqualifyinaparticular

court.

Conclusion

AlthoughBexarCountyismeetingstatutoryrequirementsregardingmagistrationwithin48hours,itis

difficulttoascertaincompliancewithadditionalrequirementsduetomilestonesnottrackedwithinthe

currentBexarCountydatabase.Attorney‐clientcontactandcomplaintsaboutattorneysarenottracked

withinthedatasystem.TheseissuesmustbeaddressedinthenewdatasystemBexarCountyis

implementing.

NotEligible

n=58,373

96%

NoBail

Reduction

n=2,148

97%

Bail

Reduction

n=66

Eligible

n=2,214

Frequencyofbailreductionsfordefendantsincarcerated

morethan90days



26



QualityofRepresentation

Inordertoevaluatethequalityofrepresentationindigentdefendantsreceive,countystakeholders

(defendants,judges,countyofficials,andattorneys)wereaskedtolistkeyattributesofquality

representation.PPRIalsoexaminedBexarCounty’sindigentdefensesystemusingtheAmericanBar

Association’sTenPrinciples.Finally,otherissuesimpactingqualityrepresentation,includingcontinuing

legaleducationandBexarCounty’smentalhealthpoliciesarediscussed.

Defendants

PPRIinterviewed197defendants:102overthephoneand95inpersonattheprobationdepartment

andaskeddefendantsthreesetsofopen‐endedquestions.Thefirstsetofquestionswas,“Whatdoes

qualityrepresentationmeantoyou?Whatarethekeyattributesforgoodqualityrepresentation?”Fifty

defendantslistedspecificallycommunicationorlisteningwereattributesofqualityrepresentationin

attorneysthattheyfeltwereimportant.Othercharacteristicsmentionedincludetheattorneycares

aboutandrespectsthedefendant,thattheywerefairandhonest,theyprovidethesamedefenseasa

hiredattorneyandtheyexplainedthecase,thecourt,andthewholeprocesstothedefendant.

Table4‐1showsadditionalresponsesconcerningqualityrepresentationandotherperceptionsofthe

criminaljusticesystemfromthedefendantsurvey.Almost50%ofdefendantsfeltthattheirattorney

listenedtotheirconcerns,andover50%ofdefendantsfelttheoutcomeoftheircasewasfair.

Defendantsoverallfeltpositivetowardsthejudgeandprosecutor;however,responsesaboutattorneys

investingadequatetimeoncases,courtsystemexplanations,andexpressingviewsincourtweremore

negative.





27



Table4‐1:DefendantSurveyResponses

Questions



%Answering

Yes



Doyoufeellikeyourattorneylistenedtoyourconcerns?(n=188) 49.5

Doyoufeellikeyourattorneyinvestedadequatetimeonyourcase?(n=189) 38.6

Wheneverthecourtsdidn’thearyourcaserightaway,someoneexplainedwhy

youhadtowait.(n=194)

35.1

Incourt,youhadtheopportunitytoexpressyourviews.(n=191) 35.1

Incourt,youunderstoodwhatwasgoingon.(n=191) 70.7

Incourt,yourdefenseattorneyspokeuponyourbehalf.(n=190) 67.9

Theprosecutortreatedyourespectfully.(n=192) 61.5

Thejudgetreatedyourespectfully.(n=192) 83.9

Thejudgemadesureyouunderstoodwhatwasgoingon.(n=192) 79.2

Overallyoufelttheoutcomeofyourcasewasfair.(n=192) 56.3

Overallyouweretreatedwithrespectincourt.(n=192) 78.7



 



SomesurveyquestionsarefromRachelSwaner,CassandraRamadath,AndrewMartinez,JosephineHahn,and

SiennaWalker(2018).Whatdodefendantsreallythink?ProceduralJusticeandLegitimacyintheCriminalJustice

System.CenterforCourtInnovation.

DefendantSurveyResponses:Yes,No,NotSure



28



Judges&CountyOfficials

Likedefendants,judgesalsocitedcommunicationasanimportantcharacteristic.Judgesstressedthe

importanceofknowingthelaw,caringabouttheclient,andvisitingdefendants.Additionally,judges

viewedattorneysappearingincourtasanotheressentialelementofqualityrepresentation.Judges

mentionedhowhearingsneededtoberesetduetoattorneysnotshowingupincourt.

Whilecommunicationandlisteningtotheclientwerementionedbycountyofficials,contactorvisiting

theclientwerediscussedmore.Competencyormentalhealth,advocatingfortheclient,returningthe

client’sphonecallsandinvestigatingthecasethoroughlywerealsokeyattributesstatedbycounty

officials.Severalcountyofficialsalsostressedthecostofrepresentationandhadconcernsaboutthe

qualityofrepresentationdefendantsarecurrentlyreceiving.

Attorneys

Likedefendantsandjudges,attorneyscitedcommunicationasatopattribute.Communicationwas

followedbyinvestigation,research,anddiscoveryincases.Attorneysstressedtheimportanceof

explainingthecasetotheclient,visitingormeetingwiththeclient,providingthesamedefenseasthey

dofortheirretainedclients,understandingthecaseandknowingthelaw.Ofinterest,onlyoneattorney

listedshowingupforcourtasanindicatorofquality.Basedonotherqualitativedata,thisseemstobea

keyconcernforothercountystakeholders.

Definingqualityofrepresentationisnotstraightforwardasitinvolvesmultipleaspectsofindigent

defense.However,asTable4‐2belowsuggests,communicationwasconsistentlymentionedacrossthe

threemainpartiesofdefense:judges,lawyers,anddefendants.Thoroughinvestigationwasanother

characteristichighlightedacrossstakeholderswiththeexceptionthatdefendantsdidnotspecifically

mentionthisattributeintheirresponses.

 



29



Table4‐2:QualityofRepresentation

Whatarethekeyattributesofquality

representation?

Defendants Judges

County

Officials

Attorneys

Communication X X X X

Thoroughinvestigation  X X X

Appearingincourt  X X X

Research  X  X

Providesamedefenseashiredattorney X   X

Explanationofprocess/case X   X

Knowingthelaw  X  X

Visiting/meetingwiththedefendant  X  X

Caring/respect X   

Fair&honest X   

Competency/mentalhealthissues   X 

Advocateforclient   X 

Returnphonecalls   X 

Discovery    X



BexarCountyIndigentDefenseSystem

PPRIexaminedBexarCounty’sindigentdefensesystemusingtheAmericanBarAssociation’sTen

PrinciplesofaPublicDefenseDeliverySystem.

BexarCounty’sindigentdefensesystemisalready

fulfillingseveraloftheseprinciples.Currently,aPublicDefenderOfficeandtheprivatedefensebar

representindigentdefendantsinBexarCounty.BexarCountyrequiresanapplicationwhereattorneys

mustprovidetheirqualificationsandexperienceinordertobegintakingcasesfromtheappointment

wheel.Defensecounselattendcontinuinglegaleducationcoursesinordertoremainonthe

appointmentwheel.

However,severalissuesstillremain.Thepublicdefensefunction,includingrequestsforinvestigation,is

stillcurrentlyunderthejudge’sdiscretion.InBexarCounty,court‐appointedattorneysmustaskjudges

forfundingtoconductinvestigations,notanindependententity.Additionally,theprivatebar’s

caseloadsarenotmonitoredtoensureattorneysarenotoverburdened.Mostimportantly,theredoes



Supranote11.



30



notappeartobeanadequatesysteminplacetosuperviseandreviewattorneyperformanceforquality

andefficiencymetricsinBexarCounty.Manyqualityindicatorsarenotcurrentlytracked.Quality

indicatorsthatarenottrackedincludeattorney‐clientcontact,complaintsaboutattorneys,and

attorneysnotappearingincourt.Manyoftheseindicatorswerehighlightedqualitativelybystakeholder

groupsinTable4‐2.

ContinuingLegalEducation(CLE)Requirements

StatutoryRequirements

TheFairDefenseActestablishedrequirementsregardingattorneys’minimumlegaleducation

requirementsforindigentdefenserepresentation.

TexasAdministrativeCodeSection174.1.states

thatanattorneymaybeappointedonlyiftheattorney:

“Completesaminimumofsixhoursofcontinuinglegaleducationpertainingtocriminallaw

duringeach12‐monthreportingperiod.Thejudgesofcriminalcourtsofthecountyshallsetthe

12‐monthreportingperiodapplicabletothejurisdiction.Continuinglegaleducationmayinclude

activitiesaccreditedunderSection4,ArticleXII,StateBarRules,self‐study,teachingatan

accreditedcontinuinglegaleducationactivity,attendanceatalawschoolclassorlegalresearch‐

basedwriting.Thejudgesmayrequireattorneystocompletemorethantheminimumnumber

ofhoursofcontinuinglegaleducationincriminallawintheproceduresdevelopedunderArticle

26.04,CodeofCriminalProcedure;or(2)IscurrentlycertifiedincriminallawbytheTexasBoard

ofLegalSpecialization.”



ABAPrinciples

TwoABAprinciplesaredirectlyrelatedtocontinuinglegaleducationrequirements:

6. Defensecounsel’sability,training,andexperiencematchthecomplexityofthecase.

9. Defensecounselisprovidedwithandrequiredtoattendcontinuinglegaleducation.



BexarCountyIndigentDefensePlan

BexarCounty’sCountyCourtindigentdefenseplanrequires:

“Anattorneyshallcompleteaminimumofsix(6)hoursofCLEintheareaofCriminallawwithin

30daysfromthedatetheattorneysubmitstheirapplicationtobeontheappointmentlist.In

additiontothosesix(6)hoursofCLEinCriminalLaw,anattorneymustprovideproofofeither

aCLEcourseinImmigrationLaworanImmigrationcomponentwithinanotherCLE

course.ThereisnominimumrequirednumberofhoursneededfortheImmigrationLaw

requirement.SaidattorneyshalltakeanyTexasStateBaraccreditedcoursededicatedto

CriminalLaw,including,butnotlimitedto,theSanAntonioCriminalDefenseLawyer's

AssociationAnnualNuts&Boltscourse;

Inadditiontotherequirementstoreceivecourtappointmentssetoutabove,attorneysapplying

formisdemeanorappointmentsmustmaintainaminimumofsix(6)hoursofCLEinCriminalLaw

andanadditionalCLEcourseorcomponentinImmigrationlawassetforthaboveannually.All

attorneysontheappointmentlistmustsubmitproofofthesehoursonanannualbasisto

CountyCourtAdministration(byJanuary15theachyear).Attorneysneedonlysubmitacopyof



Seehttp://www.tidc.texas.gov/media/5922/FDACodified2013FINAL_Revised.pdf

TACSec.174.1.



31



theirStateBarMCLEpagetoshowproofofthesehours.Wewillacceptcourseswithinaone‐

yearperiodimmediatelypreceding(calendaryear)tosatisfythesehours.Asanalternativeto

meetingtheCLErequirements,anattorneymaybecurrentlycertifiedinCriminalLawbythe

TexasBoardofLegalSpecialization.”



BexarCounty’sDistrictCourtindigentdefenseplanrequires:

 “1.Toqualifyforanyfelonyappointment,includingappealsandpost‐convictionwrits/DNA

motions,anattorneymusthavecompletedtenhoursofCLEincriminallaworprocedureinthepast

year,includingcarryoverfromthepreviousyearonly.Also,aStateBarapprovedLegislativeUpdate

SeminarmustbeattendedinanyyeartheLegislaturemeets.

2.ToqualifyfortheStateJailFelonylist,anattorneymusthaveatleastone‐yearprior

experienceincriminallitigation,andpriorexperienceasleadorco‐counselinatleastthreecriminaljury

trials.

3.ToqualifyfortheSecondandThirdDegreeFelonylist,anattorneymusthaveatleasttwo

yearspriorexperienceincriminallitigation,andpriorexperienceastrialcounselintwoormorefelony

jurytrials,asleadorco‐counsel.

4.ToqualifyfortheFirstDegreeand3(g)Felonylist,anattorneymusteitherbeboardcertified

incriminallaw,OR

 haveatleastfouryearspriorexperienceincriminallitigation;and

 havepriorexperienceastrialcounselinfourfelonyjurytrialsinthelastfiveyears,having

servedasleadcounselinatleasttwoofthosetrials;and

 havecompletedtwelvehoursofCLEincriminallaworprocedureinthelastcalendar

year.Suggestedcoursesare:TheCriminalLawInstitute(offeredannuallybytheSABA),

AdvancedCriminalLawCourse(offeredinSanAntonioonceeveryfouryears),TheShort

Course(offeredannuallybytheTCDLA).OthercoursesauthorizedbytheStateBarofTexas

incriminallaworprocedureareacceptable.”



BexarCountyCurrentPractice

Attorneysoncourtappointmentlistsmustcompletecontinuinglegaleducationrequirementstoremain

ontheappointmentwheel.Everyyear,court‐appointedattorneysinBexarCountyarerequiredto

providerecordsoftheirfulfillmentofCLErequirements.PPRIextractedarandomsampleof100

attorneyapplicationsfromtheappointmentlistandexaminedtheirCLErecordsforcompliancewiththe

CLEstandardsstatedinthecounty’sindigentdefenseplan.

AllattorneyswerecurrentwiththeirCLE

requirements.



Recommendations

BexarCountymustcontinuetomonitorcompliancewithcontinuinglegaleducationrequirements.

Complianceiscurrentlytrackedmanuallyusingemailsubmissionofdocuments.Ifcontinuinglegal

educationcompliancewasaddedtothedatamanagementsystem,trackingofcompletionofannual

requirementswouldbestreamlinedeasilyallowingthecreationofreportsforjudgesandother

interestedparties.





SeeAppendixA.



32



ThestateofTexasstatutorilyrequiresminimumcontinuinglegaleducationrequirementsforcourt

appointedattorneys.However,countiescanimplementmorestringentrequirementstobeonthe

appointmentwheel.Aspreviouslydiscussed,BexarCountycouldincreasethenumberofcontinuing

legaleducationhourstoapplyandremainontheappointmentwheel,asotherlargecountiesinTexas

require.BexarCountycouldincreasethenumberofhoursfrom12to15forfelonycases.Inorderto

remainanactivememberoftheStateBarofTexas,attorneysmustcomplete15hoursofCLEsduring

thecomplianceyear.



Whilenostandardsspecificallymentionthenumberofhoursneededtoensurequalityrepresentation

forcourtappointedattorneys,itiscrucialforallcountiestoensuretheminimumqualificationsaremet

andexamineifthenumberofhoursrequiredshouldbeincreasedbasedonattorneyperformance.



MentalHealth&OpioidIssues

StatutoryRequirements

Article16.22oftheTexasCodeofCriminalProcedureprovidesproceduresforearlyidentificationof

defendantssuspectedofhavingmentalhealthillnessorIntellectualdisability.

Thestatutestates:

“Notlaterthan12hoursafterthesherifformunicipaljailerhavingcustodyofadefendantforan

offensepunishableasaClassBmisdemeanororanyhighercategoryofoffensereceivescredible

informationthatmayestablishreasonablecausetobelievethatthedefendanthasamental

illnessorisapersonwithanintellectualdisability,thesherifformunicipaljailershallprovide

writtenorelectronicnoticetothemagistrate.Thenoticemustincludeanyinformationrelated

tothesheriff'sormunicipaljailer'sdetermination,suchasinformationregardingthe

defendant'sbehaviorimmediatelybefore,during,andafterthedefendant'sarrestand,if

applicable,theresultsofanypreviousassessmentofthedefendant.”

Additionally,Article17.032providesforthereleaseofdefendantsonpersonalbondwithamental

illnessorintellectualdisability.



ABAStandards

ABACriminalJusticeStandardsfortheDefenseFunction4‐5.2(c)statesthat:

“Ifdefensecounselhasagoodfaithdoubtregardingtheclient’scompetencetomakeimportant

decisions,counselshouldconsiderseekinganexpertevaluationfromamentalhealth

professional,withintheprotectionofconfidentialityandprivilegerulesifapplicable.”



BexarCountyIndigentDefensePlan

TheBexarCounty’sindigentdefenseplandiscussestheBexarCountyPublicDefenderOfficehandling

mentalhealthcases.





See

https://www.texasbar.com/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Definition_of_MCLE_Credit&Template=/CM/HTMLDisplay.

cfm&ContentID=49945

TexasCCP16.22

TexasCCP17.032

Seehttps://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/standards/DefenseFunctionFourthEdition/



33



TheCountyCourtPlanstates:

“PublicDefender’sOfficeforMentalHealthCases‐Anydefendantchargedwithamisdemeanor

offensewho1)hasbeendeemedtohavementalhealthissues,2)whoisfoundtobeindigent,

and3)whorequestsacourtappointedattorney,maybeassignedtotheBexarCountyPublic

Defender’sOffice.ThePre‐trialorbookingofficerwillenteran"M"codeonallcasesthat

requestacourtappointedattorneyandwhohavebeenidentifiedashavingmentalhealth

issues.The"M"CodewillappointthePublicDefender'sOfficetorepresentthosemental

healthcasesforeachmisdemeanorcategoryofoffense.Allothercaseswillbepassedontothe

"attorneyrotationwheel"assetforthinSectionIII.”

TheDistrictCourtPlanstates:

“Bystandingorder,theBexarCountyPublicDefender'sOfficeisappointedtorepresentindigent

arrestedpersonsand/orarrestedpersonswhosufferfromamentalillnessduringthearrested

person'sappearancebeforethemagistrateattheCentralMagistration(CMAG)facility,ifthe

arrestedpersonrequestscounsel,doesnotalreadyhavecounselonrecord,andfinancially

qualifies.TheappointmentoftheBexarCountyPublicDefender'sOfficeshallbeforthelimited

purposeofrepresentationofthementallyilland/orindigentarrestedpersonduringthe

magistrationprocessandrelatedsolelytothedeterminationofthebondandtheconditionsof

thebondforthearrestedperson.ThelimitedappointmentoftheBexarCountyPublic

Defender'sOfficeisconcludedupontheterminationofthemagistrationproceedingsandno

motiontowithdrawisnecessary.Atthatpointtheindigentarrestedpersonshallbeappointed

counselaccordingtotheproceduresoutlinedinthisplan,torepresentthatpersonforthe

remainderofthecase.”

BexarCountyCurrentPractice

Anotheraspectofqualityrepresentationisprovidingadequateassistancetodefendantswithmental

healthissues.BexarCountyhasinvestedagreatdealofresourcestoassistdefendantswithmental

healthissues.BexarCountyestablishedaMentalHealthConsortium,withinvolvementfromcommunity

resourcegroupsandcriminaljusticesystemstakeholders.Someofthecommunityresourcesincludethe

CenterforHealthCareServicesandtheMethodistHealthcareMinistries.TheReentryCenterisalso

anotherresourceinthecommunitythatprovideswraparoundservicestodefendants.TheReentry

CenterwascreatedbytheBexarCountyReentryCouncilin2016,aworkinggrouptoaddressissueswith

reentry.Additionally,BexarCountyhasaSpecialtyCourtsCoalition,whichincludesMentalHealth

Courts,DrugCourts,DWICourts,Veteran’sCourt,aDomesticViolenceSpecialtyCourt,andEsperanza

Court(ProstitutionPreventionCourt).TheBexarCountyPublicDefenderOfficehasfelonyand

misdemeanormentalhealthattorneyswhospecializeintheseissuesandpracticeinthementalhealth

courts.

BexarCountystakeholderswereaskedaboutmentalhealthissuesandtheopioidcrisis.Countyofficials

statedBexarCountyisinthemidstofalawsuitagainstpharmaceuticalcompanies.

Countyofficialsdid

notcommentduetotheongoinglitigation.Attorneysalsodidnotwanttocommentontheopioidcrisis,



QuixemRamirezandJoeGalli,2019,BexarCountysuingforover$1billioninopioidcase;trialdatesetfor2020,

availableathttps://news4sanantonio.com/news/local/bexar‐county‐seeking‐over‐1‐billion‐in‐opioid‐case‐trial‐

date‐set‐for‐2020



34



butothersfeltthatsomeotherdrugs(heroin,meth,andsyntheticcannabis)areabiggerproblemor

crisisthanopioids.

Judgesapproachedmentalhealthissuesfromafiscalperspective,statingthattherewasstillnotenough

fundingorresourcesforBexarCountytoadequatelyaddressmentalhealthissues.AttorneysfeltBexar

Countydidwellassistingdefendantswithmentalhealthissues,yetmostattorneysaddedtherewas

roomforimprovement.Severalattorneysobservedthebenefitsofmentalhealthprogramswere

helpingwithdivertingsomedefendantsfromjail.OthercountyofficialswhowereaskedaboutBexar

County’smentalhealthprogramsnotedthattherewerequestionsonarrestintakeformsnowto

specificallyaddressthementalhealthofdefendants.Severalofficialsalsonotedthattherehadbeen

severaldeathsinthejailindicatingthementalhealthproblemshadnotyetbeenadequatelyaddressed.

DefendantswerenotaskedspecificallyhowtheythoughttheBexarCountycriminaljusticesystem

handlesmentalhealthissues;however,severalcommentedthattheyfelttheirownmentalhealthissue

wasnotaddressed.Theyalsonotedtherewasalackofcommunicationwithdefendantswhowere

mentallyillaswellasalackoftraininginhowtotreatdefendantswithmentalillnessbythepolice.

Overall,defendantsfeltthattheirmentalhealthissueswerenotadequatelyhandledbyBexarCounty

staff.

Recommendations

BexarCountyhasinvestedagreatdealofresourcesinmentalhealthservicesfordefendantsaccording

tojudges,attorneys,andcountyofficials.However,moreresourcesmaybeneededbasedon

stakeholderfeedback.Othercountiesspecificallyutilizeamentalhealthappointmentwheel.Attorneys

onthementalhealthwheelhavespecifictrainingrequirementsinordertoqualifyforappointmentto

mentalhealthcases.BexarCountycurrentlyutilizesthePublicDefenderOfficeformentalhealthcases.



Conclusion

DefendantsfeltpositivetowardsmanyaspectsoftheBexarCountyindigentdefensesystem,butthere

werestillsignificantissuesmentioned.Whilestakeholdersdifferedonthemetricstheyvaluedas

componentsofqualityrepresentation,communicationwasakeyattributeacrossallstakeholdergroups.

BexarCountyisattemptingtoaddresstheseissues,butotherissuesstillremain.Mostimportantly,key

qualitymetricsconcerninginitialattorney‐clientcontactandattorneysnotappearingincourtarenot

trackedwithinthecurrentdatasystem.

 



35



ComparisonofRepresentation

Aspreviouslydiscussed,BexarCountyrequestedanevaluationconcerningthetypesofrepresentation

utilizedwithinthecounty.BexarCountycurrentlyhasthreetypesofrepresentation:court‐appointed

counsel,retainedcounsel,andthePublicDefenderOffice.However,duetothelackofcomparativedata

fortheBexarCountyPublicDefenderOffice,resultsforthePublicDefenderOfficearepresentedina

separatechapter.

StatutoryRequirements

Section79.036oftheTexasGovernmentCodestatesthatcountiesmustprovideindigentdefenseplans

totheTexasIndigentDefenseCommission.Theseplansmustdescribealloftheproceduresutilizedby

thecountytoprovideindigentdefendantswithcounsel.



ABAPrinciples

TheABATenPrinciplesofaPublicDefenseDeliverySystem

statesinitssecondprinciplethat:

2. Wherethecaseloadissufficientlyhigh,thepublicdefensedeliverysystemsconsistsofbotha

defenderofficeandtheactiveparticipationoftheprivatebar.



BexarCountyIndigentDefensePlan

TheBexarCountyindigentdefenseplanprovidesprovisionsfortheBexarCountyPublicDefenderOffice

tobeappointedtorepresentmentalhealthcases.Allothercasesaretobehandledbycourtappointed

attorneysfromtherotationwheel.



BexarCountyCurrentPractice

Themechanismsdrivingdisparitiesincaseoutcomesaremultifaceted.Discerningthesepotentialfacets

andtheextenttowhichtheyinfluencecaseoutcomesiscrucialtothesuccessandwellbeingof

defendantsandtheindigentdefensesystem.Caseswithcourt‐appointedcounseloftenresultinless

favorableoutcomesthancasesrepresentedbyretainedcounselorpublicdefenders.However,itcannot

beassumedthatdisparitiesinoutcomesaresolelyattributedtotypeofrepresentation.Sinceindigent

defendantscannotaffordtobondoutofjail,theyaremorelikelytoremainincarceratedduringthe

pretrialportionoftheircase.Inordertogetoutofjailquickly,anincarceratedindigentdefendantis

morelikelytoacceptapleadeal.Theremaybesystematicdifferencesindefendant,case,andattorney

characteristicsbetweenassignedandretainedcounsel,makingitdifficulttodisentanglethefactors

drivingtherepresentationgapincaseoutcomes.



Tables5‐1to5‐9providesummariesofdefendant,case,andattorneycharactersbrokendownbythe

typeofthelastattorneyrepresentingthecasebeforethefirstdispositionformisdemeanorandfelony

cases,respectively.

ThesampleincludesonlycasesthatwerebookedbetweenJanuary1,2016and



TexasGovernmentCodeSec.79.036

Supranote11.

Themultivariatesectioninthischapterdoesinfactcontrolforthesesystematicdifferences.Thefindingssuggest

examinedoutcomes(dismissal,guiltyplea,andincarceration)ofdefendantsrepresentedbycourt‐appointed

attorneysareonaverageworsethanthoserepresentedbyretainedcounsel.Detailedresultsareavailableupon

request.

Thelastattorneyonacaseisassumedtohavethemostimpactoncaseoutcomes.



36



April30,2019withanoffensedateonorafterJanuary1,1990.Overall,thereare71,249uniquecases,

60%beingmisdemeanorcasesandtheremainingfelonies.Approximately80%ofmisdemeanorand

felonycasesarerepresentedbycourt‐appointedcounsel.



PPRIexaminedtheapparentdifferencesinobservabledefendantandcasecharacteristics,represented

inTables5‐1and5‐2.Defendantsarerelativelysimilarinregardstoageandgenderacrossattorney

typesformisdemeanorcases.Bothtypesofattorneysrepresentmostlymalesintheirearlytomid‐30’s.

Defendantsrepresentedbyretainedcounselaremorelikelytobewhiteandlesslikelytobeblackthan

thoserepresentedbycourt‐appointedattorneys.Defendantswhoretaincounselareabout8

percentagepointslesslikelytobeblackthandefendantswhoarerepresentedbycourt‐appointed

counsel.



Table5‐1:MisdemeanorDefendantCharacteristicsforCourt‐AppointedCounselandRetainedCounsel

  Court‐appointed(n=34,038) Retained(n=8,243)

A.DefendantCharacteristics   

  Mean Mean

Male  73.6% 74.2%

AgeatOffense  32.3 32.4

White  45% 56.1%

Black  17.7% 9.5%

Hispanic  36.2% 32.5%

ChargesperBookingDay  1.2 1.0

PreviousCharges  0.9 0.4



Whenadefendantisbooked,theaveragenumberofchargesadefendanthasissimilaracrossattorney

types.However,defendantsrepresentedbyretainedcounselhavefewerpreviouschargesthan

defendantsrepresentedbycourt‐appointedcounsel,implyingthatcourt‐appointedcounselrepresent

defendantswithmoreseriouscriminalhistories.Retainedcounselarealsomorelikelytorepresent

caseswithhigherlevelcharges.



Table5‐2:MisdemeanorCaseCharacteristicsforCourt‐AppointedCounselandRetainedCounsel

  Court‐appointed(n=34,038) Retained(n=8,243)

B.CaseCharacteristics   

  Mean Mean

MA  45.7% 51.3%

MB  54.3% 48.7%



Table5‐3revealsdifferencesinattorneycharacteristicsacrossattorneytype.Twomeasuresareusedto

examineexperience–yearssincelawschoolgraduationandthenumberofcasespreviously

represented,bothmeasuredatthedateofattorneyappointment.Lookingatyearssincegraduation,

court‐appointedandretainedcounselhaveasimilarlevelofexperience.



Whenlookingatpreviouscases,court‐appointedattorneyshavemoreexperiencethanretainedcounsel

formisdemeanors.Thenumberofcasespreviouslyrepresentedwithinayearisusedtomeasure



37



caseloadatthetimeofappointment.Formisdemeanors,whenacourt‐appointedattorneyisassigneda

case,theyhaverepresented43.3morecasesthatyearthanretainedcounsel,onaverage.

Table5‐3:MisdemeanorAttorneyCharacteristicsforCourt‐AppointedCounselandRetainedCounsel

  Court‐appointed(n=34,038) Retained(n=8,243)

C.AttorneyCharacteristics   

  Mean Mean

YearsofExperience  19.1 19.3

PreviousCases  148.9 105.6

PercentMisdemeanors  74.4% 60.2%

PercentAssigned  93.3% 41.1%



Table5‐4suggeststhatcasesrepresentedbyassignedcounselresultinworseoutcomes.Misdemeanor

casesrepresentedbyretainedcounselaremorelikelytobedismissedandreceivedeferredadjudication

thancasesrepresentedbyassignedcounsel.Casesrepresentedbyretainedcounselare13.3percentage

pointsmorelikelytobedismissedthancasesrepresentedbycourt‐appointedcounsel.Thepercentage

pointdifferencebetweendefendantsincarceratedwithretainedcounselanddefendantsincarcerated

withassignedcounselislargestformisdemeanorcases.Defendantsrepresentedbyretainedcounselare

32.5percentagepointslesslikelytobeincarceratedthandefendantsrepresentedbyassignedcounsel.

Theaveragesentencelengthfordefendantsrepresentedbycourt‐appointedcounselis20dayslonger

thantheaveragesentencelengthfordefendantswhoretainedcounsel.



Table5‐4:MisdemeanorCaseOutcomesforCourt‐AppointedCounselandRetainedCounsel

  Court‐appointed(n=34,038) Retained(n=8,243)

D.CaseOutcomes   

  Mean Mean

GuiltyPlea/NoloContendere  47.0% 27.5%

GuiltybyTrial  <1% <1%

AcquittalbyTrial  <1% <1%

DeferredAdjudication  17.7% 23.7%

Dismissal  34.9% 48.2%

Probation  <1% 15.3%

Incarcerated  47.1% 14.6%

Sentence(Days)  29.3 9.3



Anothercomponentofthedrivingforcebehinddisparitiesinoutcomesforcaseswithdifferenttypesof

representationisattorneyeffort.Theamountofeffortexertedonacasebycounselisnotdirectly

observable;however,twopossibleindicatorsofattorneyeffortarethelengthoftimebetweenarrest

andfirstdispositionandiftherearehearingresetsaftercounselisassigned/retained.

Shortercaselengthscanallowjaileddefendantstoavoidlosingemploymentiftheyremainedin

custody.However,somedefendantsmayenterpleasquicklytoavoidtheseoutcomesandgetoutofjail.

Shortercaselengthmayalsobemotivatedbycaseloadsandpayment.Becausethecountydoesnot

limitthenumberofcasesthatassignedcounselcanreceive,court‐appointedcounselmaytakeona



38



largenumberofcases,makingitdifficulttoprovidequalityrepresentationduetotimeconstraints.Low

compensationpaidonaflatfeebasiscanalsoresultinadecreaseintheamountoftimespentoncases

ifthecompensationdoesnotjustifytheadditionaleffortrequiredtospendtheappropriateamountof

timeonacase.FromTable5‐5,court‐appointedcounselresolvecases105dayssoonerthanretained

counselformisdemeanorsand80dayssoonerthanretainedcounselforfelonies.Casesrepresentedby

retainedcounselare20percentagepointsmorelikelytohaveahearingresetformisdemeanors,while

thepercentageofhearingresetsbetweenretainedandassignedcounselissimilarforfelonycases.

Hearingresetsmayindicatethatcounselisnotappearingincourtortheyarenotreadytoproceedwith

thecasebecausetheyneedtoconductfurtherinvestigation.Anotherreasonforahearingresetis

discoveryinformationhasnotbeenmadeavailabletodefensecounsel.However,intheCJISdatabase,

caseresetsarenotshownbyparty,meaningthesystemdoesnotindicatewhethertheprosecutionor

defenseisrequestingthedelay.Additionally,bailreductionsaresimilarformisdemeanorsacross

attorneytype;however,retainedattorneysaremorelikelytosecurebailreductionsinfelonycasesfor

theirclientscomparedtocourt‐appointedattorneys.

Table5‐5:MeasuresofAttorneyEffortbyCourt‐AppointedandRetainedCounsel

forMisdemeanorsandFelonies

  Court‐appointed Retained

  Mean  Mean

Misdemeanors



(n=34,038)



(n=8,243)

HearingResetAfterAppointment 15.1%  35.0%

CaseLength(days)126.6  231.7

BailReduction0.9%  0.6%

  Felonies

 

(n=23,315)



(n=5,653)

HearingResetAfterAppointment  36.5%  35.8%

CaseLength(days)  173.3  253.6

BailReduction  1.4%  2.7%



PPRIexaminedtheapparentdifferencesinobservabledefendantandcasecharacteristicsforfelonies,

representedinTables5‐6and5‐7.Defendantsarerelativelysimilarinregardstoageandgenderacross

attorneytypesforfelonycases.Bothtypesofattorneysrepresentmostlymalesintheirearlytomid‐

30’s.Defendantsrepresentedbyretainedcounselaremorelikelytobewhiteandlesslikelytobeblack

thanthoserepresentedbycourt‐appointedattorneys.Additionally,statejailfeloniesaremorelikelyto

berepresentedbycourt‐appointedcounsel;however,firstdegreefeloniesaremorelikelytobe

representedbyretainedcounsel.Similartomisdemeanors,defendantsrepresentedbyretainedcounsel

havefewerpreviouschargesthandefendantsrepresentedbycourt‐appointedcounsel,implyingthat

court‐appointedcounselrepresentdefendantswithmoreseriouscriminalhistoriesinfelonycases.

 



39



Table5‐6:FelonyDefendantCharacteristicsfor

Court‐AppointedCounselandRetainedCounsel

  Court‐appointed(n=23,315) Retained(n=5,653)

A.DefendantCharacteristics   

  Mean Mean

Male  76.7% 80.2%

AgeatOffense  34.7 33.9

White  35.8% 45.1%

Black  16.7% 11.6%

Hispanic  46.7% 42.2%

ChargesperBookingDay  1.4 1.4

PreviousCharges  1.2 0.9

Table5‐7:FelonyCaseCharacteristicsfor

Court‐AppointedCounselandRetainedCounsel

  Court‐appointed(n=23,315) Retained(n=5,653)

B.CaseCharacteristics   

  Mean Mean

FC  0.1% 0.1%

F1  8.1% 14.0%

F2  14.5% 16.4%

F3  30.4% 40.1%

FS  47.4% 31.2%



Table5‐8displaysattorneycharacteristicsforfelonycases.Bothretainedandcourt‐appointedcounsel

havesimilaryearsofexperience,withretainedcounselonlyslightlyhigher.

Table5‐8:FelonyAttorneyCharacteristicsfor

Court‐AppointedCounselandRetainedCounsel

  Court‐appointed(n=23,315) Retained(n=5,653)

C.AttorneyCharacteristics   

  Mean Mean

YearsofExperience  21.6 22.3

PreviousCases  122.6 136.4

PercentMisdemeanors  47.1% 47.3%

PercentAssigned  87.4% 41.2%



Table5‐9displaysfelonycasesoutcomesbyattorneytype.Caseswithretainedcounselare11.7

percentagepointsmorelikelytobedismissed.Casesrepresentedbyretainedcounselarealsolesslikely

tohaveaguiltyplea/nolocontendereandlesslikelytoresultinincarceration.Theaveragesentence

lengthfordefendantsrepresentedbycourt‐appointedcounselis75.5dayslongerthantheaverage

sentencelengthfordefendantswhoretainedcounsel.



 



40



Table5‐9:FelonyCaseOutcomesfor

Court‐AppointedCounselandRetainedCounsel

  Court‐appointed(n=23,315) Retained(n=5,653)

D.CaseOutcomes   

  Mean Mean

GuiltyPlea/NoloContendere  41.8% 31.0%

GuiltybyTrial  <1% <1%

AcquittalbyTrial  <1% <1%

Dismissal  49.8% 61.5%

Probation  <1% 11.8%

Incarcerated  41.5% 22.4%

Sentence(Days)  479.0 403.5

Recommendations

BexarCountyofficialsneedtomonitorattorneyperformance.Indicatorsofattorneyperformanceapart

fromcaselengthandoutcomesincludehearingresetsandattorneysnotappearingincourt.However,

hearingresetscanindicateadditionalfactorsareoccurringinthecase,suchasinvestigation.Inthe

currentdatasystem,hearingresetsaretracked,butthepartyrequestingtheresetisnot.Additionally,

attorneysnotappearingincourtarenottracked.Ifthesevariableswereincludedinthedata

managementsystem,themetricscouldprovidevaluableandtimelyinsightintoattorneyperformance.

MultivariateLogisticRegressionAnalysis

Thissectionbrieflysummarizestheresultsfromamultivariatelogisticregressionanalysis.Amultivariate

logisticregressionallowsustoidentifywhethercourtappointedattorneysinfluencecaseoutcomes

whileaccountingforotherpossiblefactors(suchascase,defendant,andattorneycharacteristics),which

couldalsoaffectthoseoutcomes.Accountingforthesefactorsallowsustoexamineifdisparitiesin

outcomespersistwhenthesameattorneyisrepresentingcasesasassignedandretainedcounselinthe

sameyear.Caseoutcomesevaluatedinthissectionaredismissal,guilty/nolocontendereplea,and

incarceration.Thefindingsaresummarizedbelow:

 Intermsofdismissals:

o Court‐appointedattorneysarelesslikelytobeassociatedwithdismissalsrelativeto

retainedcounsel.

 Intermsofpleas:

o Court‐appointedattorneysaremorelikelytobeassociatedwithpleasrelativeto

retainedcounsel.

 Intermsofincarcerations:

o Court‐appointedattorneysaremorelikelytobeassociatedwithincarcerationsrelative

toretainedcounsel.

Conclusion

PPRIexaminedcaseelementsandoutcomesbyattorneytype,usingmultivariateregressionanalysisto

accountforotherfactors,whichcouldinfluencedisparitiesinoutcomes.Thefindingssuggestexamined

outcomes(dismissal,guiltyplea,andincarceration)ofdefendantsrepresentedbycourt‐appointed

attorneysareonaverageworsethanthoserepresentedbyretainedcounsel. 



41



BexarCountyPublicDefenderOffice

Aspreviouslymentioned,thePublicDefenderOfficeismadeupofthefollowingdivisions:appellate,

misdemeanorandfelonymentalhealth,mentalhealthcivil,misdemeanortrial(onlyoperatesincourts

wherejudgeselecttohavethePublicDefender)andmagistration.AsoftheFallof2019,theBexar

CountyPublicDefenderOfficewascomprisedof13attorneys(oneofwhichistheChiefPublic

Defender).Inordertocontactclients,theBexarCountyPublicDefenderOfficerequestedandhastheir

ownprivateRAVstationforthepublicdefenderstoutilize.



Currently,theBexarCountyPublicDefenderhasalimitedandspecializedcaseload,representingmental

healthcases.Thesecasesareoftenverycomplexandpresentuniquechallenges.Theofficecould

representmorecases;however,qualitativeinterviewsindicatedthatnotallcourtsutilizedthePublic

DefenderOfficeasaresource.Itshouldalsobenotedthatpublicdefendersrepresentmisdemeanor

cases,buttheircaseloadisverysmallcomparedtocourt‐appointedandretainedcounsel.

60





Duetodifferencesinrepresentationandthesignificantlydifferentnumberofobservationsacrossall

attorneytypes,directcomparisonsbetweenoutcomesforcourt‐appointed,retainedcounsel,andpublic

defenderscouldnotbecompleted.DescriptiveanalysisofthePublicDefender’sOffice’sdefendants,

caseandattorneycharacteristics,andoutcomesarepresentedindependentlyinthischapter.Inorderto

fullyevaluatetheBexarCountyPublicDefenderOffice,adifferentresearchapproachwouldbe

required.



StatutoryRequirements

Article26.044oftheTexasCodeofCriminalProcedureprovidesstatutesrelatingtooperatingapublic

defenderoffice.Additionally,Article26.04(a)and(f)provideforthepriorityappointmentofapublic

defenderoffice.Article26.04(f)states:

“Inacountywithapublicdefender'soffice,thecourtorthecourts'designeeshallgivepriority

inappointingthatofficetorepresentthedefendantinthecriminalproceeding,includinga

proceedinginacapitalmurdercase.However,thecourtisnotrequiredtoappointthepublic

defender'sofficeif:

(1)thecourtmakesafindingofgoodcauseforappointingothercounsel,providedthat

inacapitalmurdercase,thecourtmakesafindingofgoodcauseontherecordfor

appointingthatcounsel;

(2)theappointmentwouldbecontrarytotheoffice'swrittenplanunderArticle26.044;

(3)theofficeisprohibitedfromacceptingtheappointmentunderArticle26.044(j).”



ABAPrinciples

TheABATenPrinciplesofaPublicDefenseDeliverySystem

statesinitssecondprinciplethat:

2. Wherethecaseloadissufficientlyhigh,thepublicdefensedeliverysystemsconsistsofbotha

defenderofficeandtheactiveparticipationoftheprivatebar. 



TheBexarCountyPublicDefenderOfficerepresentsfelonycases;however,thenumberofcasesis6.

TexasCCP26.04

Supranote11.



42



BexarCountyIndigentDefensePlan

TheBexarCountyindigentdefenseplanprovidesprovisionsfortheBexarCountyPublicDefenderOffice

tobeappointedtorepresentmentalhealthcases.Allothercasesaretobehandledbycourtappointed

attorneysfromtherotationwheel.



BexarCounty’sCountyCourtPlanstates:

“PublicDefender’sOffice–AccordingtoCCP26.04(a),theproceduresforappointingcounselfor

anindigentdefendantmustprovideforthepriorityappointmentofapublicdefender’s

office.Atthistime,theChiefPublicDefenderinBexarCountyhasindicatedthatthePublic

Defender'sOfficewillnotseekanyadditionalappointmentspursuanttoCCP26.04(effective

9/1/19),otherthantheonestheirofficeiscurrentlyreceivingfromtheappointmentwheel.



PursuanttoCCP,Art.26.04(f),thecourtisnotrequiredtoappointthepublicdefender'sofficeif:

1. Thecourtmakesafindingofgoodcauseforappointingothercounsel;

2. Theappointmentwouldbecontrarytotheoffice'swrittenplanunderArticle26.044;

3. TheofficeisprohibitedfromacceptingtheappointmentunderArticle26.044(j);or

4. Amanagedassignedcounselprogramalsoexistsinthecountyandanattorneywillbe

appointedunderthatprogram.



PursuanttoCCP26.044(j),thePublicDefender’sofficemaynotacceptanappointmentif:

1.Aconflictofinterestexiststhathasnotbeenwaivedbytheclient;

2.Theofficehasinsufficientresourcestoprovideadequaterepresentationforthedefendant;

3.Theofficeisincapableofprovidingrepresentationinaccordancewiththerulesof

professionalconduct;

4.Acceptanceoftheappointmentwouldviolatethemaximumallowablecaseloadsestablished

fortheoffice;or

5.Theofficeshowsothergoodcausefornotacceptingtheappointment.”



BexarCounty’sDistrictCourtPlanstates: