San Mateo County will conduct more frequent evaluations of its Private Defender Program and make sure it meets state and federal requirements that poor defendants are provided with competent legal counsel, according to a response letter to the civil grand jury.
The grand jury reported in July that evaluations of the program were too infrequent and that the county must prove its approach to indigent defense is consistent with state and national guidelines.
The grand jury made four recommendations related to the program and the county has agreed to follow them all, according to a staff report by County Manager John Maltbie.
The recommendations include that the county conduct evaluations of the Private Defender Program at least every five years; determine whether it meets state and federal guidelines; open up the evaluations to the general public; and to determine whether it continues to be the best model for the county for providing indigent legal defense.
The county is required to respond to the report although it is not mandated that it follow any of the grand jury’s recommendations.
The county is the only in the state with a population over 500,000 that does not work through a Public Defender’s Office to provide counsel to defendants who cannot afford to hire their own attorneys.
The county instead contracts with the San Mateo County Bar Association to provide legal services for its indigent defendants. Attorneys in the program are considered independent contractors and are not county employees.
The program’s Chief Defender John Digiacinto told the Daily Journal previously that he is open to more frequent evaluations.
“We enjoy the scrutiny,” he said.
Detractors of the county’s Private Defender Program contend it leads to many defendants of color taking plea deals with the District Attorney’s Office rather than finding justice with a jury.
According to the civil grand jury report, the agreement with the bar allows for contract evaluations at any time but none were conducted for nearly a decade between 2003 and 2012.
It also found that the last three evaluations of the contract, in 2001, 2003 and 2012, did not address whether the county considered state and federal guidelines in its review.
In the 2012 evaluation of the program, the civil grand jury found that it was limited to public input to those specifically invited to participate and was not open to the public.
The three evaluations also did not conclude whether the Private Defender Program “continues to be the best model for the county to provide indigent legal defense,” according to the civil grand jury report.
In response, the county has agreed to “gather input from clients, community members and organizations and include an opportunity for members of the public to provide input,” according to Maltbie’s report to the Board of Supervisors Tuesday.
Supervisor Dave Pine was on the 2012 review panel of the program.
He agrees with the civil grand jury’s recommendations.
The Private Defender Program serves an important function, he said after the report was released.
“People’s liberties are on the line,” he said.
The grand jury is calling for a “more disciplined review of the program and that makes sense,” Pine said last month.
By Bill Silvefarb
bill@smdailyjournal.com
San Mateo Daily Journal
September 2, 2015
No comments:
Post a Comment