This past weekend, I published a story for The Commonwealth assessing Mississippi’s 23 circuit court districts’ indigent defense plans — that is how each of those courts provides lawyers to indigent, or poor, criminal defendants charged with a felony who can’t afford their own counsel.
These plans are available on the Mississippi Supreme Court’s website, giving us the ability to review how each of the state’s circuit court districts, where trials for felony crimes are held, complies with the Sixth Amendment’s constitutional guarantee that criminal defendants receive a lawyer.
It reflects a huge step in matters of transparency, given Mississippi, compared to other states, tends to lag when it comes to not only the availability of records but providing electronic access to those records.
Yet, these indigent defense plans only reveal so much. Only a third of the state’s judicial districts have plans that clearly state how lawyers are appointed to represent indigent defendants following arrest and that these lawyers are appointed by a defendant’s first appearance before a judge.
Most of the plans only focus on appointment of counsel after a defendant has been indicted, when their case finally enters a circuit court, even though a case for a felony offense begins the moment after a defendant is arrested as that offense is handled in a justice court before its transferred to the circuit court.
Because there can be delays between an arrest and when a defendant is indicted, it’s pivotal to know how a lawyer is appointed for representation in the misdemeanor court. The fact that this is unclear poses one issue.
My piece, I admit, is probably a bit too technical, likely to capture the interests of lawyers and legal scholars, rather than the average reader or those who’ve had direct experiences with the criminal justice system.
But if there’s two takeaways from my article that are worth remembering, it’s these: firstly, if you are charged with a felony, you should be given the opportunity to request legal counsel as soon as possible after arrest. The earlier the better, preferably within 24 hours of arrest. That’s the ideal, at least, given one core tenet of criminal defense is that appointment of counsel should take place as soon as possible. Secondly, if arrested and charged on a felony, you should have a hearing before a judge within 48 hours of arrest if you happen to still be in jail. It’s at this hearing, known as an initial appearance, that a judge appoints you a lawyer if you need one (unless you happened to have already received a court-appointed attorney).
The fact that many of the state’s circuit court districts’ indigent defense plans are unclear in these two respects marks another alleged flaw in Mississippi’s patchwork public defender system.
To be clear, unclear plans do not imply lack of appropriate representation for defendants in and out of the courtroom. It just means it’s unclear if what’s stated on the plans is actually happening in and out of the courtrooms. This leads to yet again another issue with the state’s public defender system, in that outside of the practitioners of a circuit court district, it’s unclear what exactly is occurring within the state’s trial rooms. Court districts are not required to collect data that could be pivotal for assessing case loads, attorney appointments and outcomes, among other factors.
In the case of the indigent defense plans, the Mississippi Supreme Court does not seem to be in a position to judge whether these plans are sufficient or not, as an associate justice told me.
If it’s to address any issues, it only does so after responding to complaints filed by an attorney or a defendant. And in other cases, the state Supreme Court only becomes aware of issues through media reports, given the lack of any centralized accountability monitoring system.
This means the state’s high court is reactive, rather than proactive, when addressing deficiencies. Think of it as akin to Whac-A-Mole.
It’s left up to the state Legislature to fix, or really reform, the state’s fragmented public defense system, but no bills have been passed and implemented yet.
One small measure of progress is state lawmakers have passed a bill that’s currently funding a pilot project in the 5th Circuit Court District — a cluster of counties in the Hills, including Carroll — that seeks to provide defendants with a lawyer within 24-hours-of arrest, known as day one representation.
That pilot, in operation since last year, has had some success so far, although it’s still too early to tell if it could be replicated statewide. Still, given that the pilot project is required to collect data, it allows policymakers a means to thoroughly assess the effectiveness of early appointment of legal counsel.
Why is any of this significant at all? Given Mississippi’s overall high rates of poverty, crime and arrest rates — which are particularly pronounced in Leflore and other counties in the Delta — it’s safe to assume a large number of people arrested and charged with felonies throughout the state and the Delta will likely need to rely on a public defender. If it’s unclear how and when a defendant receives a lawyer, and if there’s no centralized system of accountability to ensure the Sixth Amendment is being delivered, this leaves room for potential harm committed against defendants in terms of long stays in jail without any legal representation.
A reformed public defense system wouldn’t only help defendants — who are innocent until proven guilty in a courtroom — but families and friends of victims of crimes as well, since cases would, presumably, be resolved more quicky.
It’s just a matter of whether or not Mississippi prioritizes a better application of the Sixth Amendment.
- Gerard Edic is a corps member with Report for America, a national service program that places journalists into local newsrooms. Contact him at 662-581-7237 or gedic@gwcommonwealth.com. You can support his work with a tax-deductible donation at bit.ly/4wM0wV6.
