Indigent defense reforms discussed

Citing skyrocketing caseloads, public defender offices in Clark and Washoe counties may begin withdrawing from cases on ethical grounds, which would force counties to increase staffing at the agencies or find and fund alternatives.

At a second Nevada Supreme Court public hearing on indigent defense, Chief Justice William Maupin asked county managers whether they are prepared to deal with this possible mass exodus by public defenders.

Clark County Assistant County Manager Jeff Wells said the county was looking at hiring more lawyers for Public Defender Phil Kohn's office, despite the county's projected $42 million budget shortfall.

Kohn, whose deputies each handle about 400 felony cases a year, said he would hold off on a decision to withdraw from cases until he sees how the county responds to the Supreme Court's possible adoption of caseload and performance standards.

"We've agonized over this for months," Kohn said. "If the court imposes caseload limits and the county won't give us what we need, we will immediately declare ourselves unavailable."

If this happens, overflow cases, at least in the short term, probably would go to part-time public defenders, so-called conflict attorneys who generally handle cases the public defender's office cannot because of conflicts of interest.

That system recently was reformed in response to a Review-Journal series in March about its lack of oversight, but those changes are untested and still being implemented.

The Supreme Court is expected to spend several weeks deciding how to proceed on a proposal by a commission that spent eight months examining indigent defense.

The justices can endorse or adopt some or all of the proposals. Many would require legislative approval.

Assembly Judiciary Committee Chairman Bernie Anderson, D-Sparks, said he is prepared to review the actions taken by the Supreme Court.

"I'll take what they say very seriously," Anderson said. "Everybody in our court system deserves an adequate defense."

The panel of jurists, court administrators, and equal-justice advocates was formed after the newspaper series.

The indigent defense commission's most far-reaching proposals involve caseload and performance standards for public defenders statewide.

The performance rules, which spell out certain procedures public defenders must follow in all criminal cases, have received no opposition.

Caseload standards, however, have been the subject of great debate.

Kohn said at Thursday's hearing that his office would need about 24 additional attorneys over the course of several years to allow each attorney to approach the maximum proposed felony caseload of 192.

Washoe County Public Defender Jeremy Bosler told the Supreme Court on Thursday that his attorneys have an average of only about two hours to spend on each case they get.

Caseload caps are opposed by county financial managers, District Judge Stewart Bell, and the Nevada Advisory Council for Prosecuting Attorneys. But national groups including the American Civil Liberties Union have threatened lawsuits if Nevada doesn't make reforms.

The Supreme Court also heard testimony on Thursday about indigent defense crises in rural counties. The commission has recommended increasing the funding and independence of the state public defender's office to improve indigent defense in those counties.

Elgin Simpson, a community activist and longtime critic of indigent defense in the state, told the justices that he hopes their work helps lead Nevada's indigent defense system "out of the dark ages."

In closing Thursday's meeting, Maupin called the discussions "the most important examination of the criminal justice system that has occurred in recent years."

Contact reporter Alan Maimon at amaimon @reviewjournal.com or (702) 383-0404.