October 23, 2013
How Much Does a Public Defender Need to Know About a Client?

Earlier this month, the New Jersey Supreme Court issued a ruling in a case that didn’t generate much publicity in the Garden State or anywhere else. It was just another opinion, about another indigent criminal defendant whose case was processed through a justice system that was relentlessly more concerned with efficiency than with justice. Sadly, it’s not big news today when our nation’s judges permit a person’s fair trial rights to be violated in a way that both shocks the conscience and violates the Constitution.
In State v. Terrence Miller, four justices of the state supreme court—over a lone dissent—affirmed the conviction of a man indicted on drug charges who met his lawyer for the first time for a few minutes in a stairwell at the courthouse on the morning of trial. The lawyer had not tried a criminal case in seven years and had been appointed to Miller’s case only four days before trial. He never spoke to any witnesses, or to Miller’s former attorney, or to investigators in the public defender’s office. He didn’t know what his client would say on the witness stand.
Read more. [Image: Associated Press]

How Much Does a Public Defender Need to Know About a Client?

Earlier this month, the New Jersey Supreme Court issued a ruling in a case that didn’t generate much publicity in the Garden State or anywhere else. It was just another opinion, about another indigent criminal defendant whose case was processed through a justice system that was relentlessly more concerned with efficiency than with justice. Sadly, it’s not big news today when our nation’s judges permit a person’s fair trial rights to be violated in a way that both shocks the conscience and violates the Constitution.

In State v. Terrence Miller, four justices of the state supreme court—over a lone dissent—affirmed the conviction of a man indicted on drug charges who met his lawyer for the first time for a few minutes in a stairwell at the courthouse on the morning of trial. The lawyer had not tried a criminal case in seven years and had been appointed to Miller’s case only four days before trial. He never spoke to any witnesses, or to Miller’s former attorney, or to investigators in the public defender’s office. He didn’t know what his client would say on the witness stand.

Read more. [Image: Associated Press]

  1. anindiscriminatecollection reblogged this from theatlantic
  2. margelthesophant reblogged this from willnobilis
  3. willnobilis reblogged this from knowledgeequalsblackpower
  4. kitkuzma reblogged this from theatlantic
  5. emotionallybrilliant reblogged this from timecubed
  6. winkinggorgon reblogged this from aka14kgold
  7. aka14kgold reblogged this from generalbriefing and added:
    Another lovely reflection of just about everything wrong with the legal system.
  8. hugahalf-elf reblogged this from generalbriefing and added:
    how the fuck is this not ineffective counsel??
  9. kr-reed reblogged this from theatlantic
  10. homeappliances5 reblogged this from theatlantic
  11. latbb reblogged this from journolist
  12. dragonfroyo reblogged this from iamlittlei
  13. harajuku-doll88 reblogged this from persistentgrowth
  14. intellocgent reblogged this from persistentgrowth
  15. relivethesplendor reblogged this from theatlantic
  16. mudiooch reblogged this from theatlantic
  17. brevity-wit reblogged this from theatlantic
  18. generic-scrubnoob reblogged this from revolutionizeed and added:
    'right to an attorney' my ass.
  19. damienericwallace reblogged this from theatlantic
  20. iamlittlei reblogged this from revolutionizeed
  21. smrfysmrfysmrf reblogged this from revolutionizeed
  22. profkew reblogged this from theatlantic