NCJ Number
79803
Journal
NLADA Briefcase Volume: 38 Issue: 2 Dated: (Fall 1981) Pages: 41-52
Date Published
1981
Length
12 pages
Annotation
Some reasons defense counsel have not given higher priority to pretrial release are discussed as are strategies defenders might use to increase pretrial release.
Abstract
The most important reason for public defenders' failing to become greatly involved in pretrial release issues is the traditional concept of legal representation. Pretrial detention for those who cannot afford to meet the bail set for them is viewed by defenders as a systemic problem that cannot be addressed in cases of individual representation. Further, the overworked defender probably finds it more expedient for pretrial release issues to be addressed in civil class actions by legal services offices and pro bono civil attorneys. Civil lawyers, however, are likely to believe that the public defender, who has daily contact with detainees and access to the critical release information, is responsible for pretrial release reform. Some suggested tactics for reducing the excessive use of pretrial detention are as follows: (1) every defender office should study the extent and causes of overincarceration in its jurisdiction; (2) public defender training programs should give more emphasis to pretrial release; (3) individual bail application should be presented more vigorously; (4) for trial defenders to secure the release of more detainees, the management of the public defender office should provide systemwide support; (5) public defenders should seek to involve civil legal aid offices in appropriate pretrial release issues; and (6) in areas of pretrial advocacy where the defender office cannot take the initiative, it should still involve itself in local criminal justice networks. Pretrial detention reform efforts are described for defender offices in Detroit, Mich.; New York City; Santa Clara County, Calif.; and Dade County, Fla. Twenty-two footnotes are listed.