Notable Recent Publications features the latest empirical research and data related to indigent/public defense. If you have suggestions, ideas for work that should be included, or trouble accessing any of the articles featured, please write to Venita Embry at vembry@rti.org.
Articles
Davies, A., Sirivore, S., & Smiegocki, V. (2025). If you
cannot afford an attorney, none will be appointed for you: Exploring rates of
representation by counsel in Texas misdemeanor courts. Journal of Criminal
Justice & Law, Volume 8, Issue 2. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4696942
All misdemeanor defendants in the United States have the right to be represented by a lawyer if they are facing the possibility of incarceration. Yet implementation of that right is often left to local policymakers, and rates of non-representation (defendants proceeding without lawyers) vary enormously. Through an examination of data from Texas counties in 2019, we find non-representation rates were highest in the state’s poorest and most rural counties. But we also find signs that local policy choices matter. Counties with public defender offices, and those with less restrictive policies on financial eligibility for indigent defense services, appointed lawyers to substantially more misdemeanor defendants, and had substantially lower non-representation rates as a result. State officials should encourage policy choices that can effectively uphold defendants’ constitutional rights and create more equitable access to counsel, no matter where a defendant happens to be prosecuted.
Perlin, Michael L. and Dorfman, Deborah A., "It Don't Matter
Anyhow": How the Americans with Disabilities Act Has Become (Mostly)
Irrelevant to the Criminal Trial Process (February 27, 2025). https://ssrn.com/abstract=5160324 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5160324
The application of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (42
U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.) to all aspects of the criminal justice
system is a remarkably under-considered one, but it is one that should be of
far greater interest to all those whose work involves this system in any way,
as well as to scholars whose work touches on either the ADA, criminal justice
or both. In this paper, we focus on the multiple connections between the two,
with specific considerations of issues that affect arrestees with mental
illness or disability in the pretrial and trial processes. and how Title II of
the ADA can be enforced in civil litigation in the context of criminal
proceedings. We also will examine the therapeutic jurisprudence implications of
judicial decisions in this area, and note the artificial intelligence
implications of the questions we consider.
Our studies reveal an inescapable truth: the ADA has had virtually no impact on
the criminal justice system at all. Only a handful of cases have ever granted
relief to civil plaintiffs in such matters, a finding that is certainly ironic
in light of the fact that the Supreme Court, unanimously -- and per Justice
Scalia --ruled years ago in a decision that has never been questioned or
limited (see Pennsylvania Dep’t of Corrections v. Yeskey, 524 U.S. 206
(1998)) that the ADA applies to state prisons and claims of prisoners, a
universe that has always had fewer rights than those not yet convicted of
crime.
Here, we focus on how counsel must take the lead in urging courts to enforce
the ADA in cases involving the population in question, and conclude that
the application of the ADA to all aspects of the criminal trial process
(defining this phrase as broadly as possible, including cases in the pretrial
stage, at trial, at the plea stage, at sentencing, and more) fits perfectly
into a therapeutic jurisprudence framework, focusing especially on questions
related to adequacy of counsel, and the need for dignity and compassion in all
aspects of this process.
Wilford, Miko, Rachele Difava, and Kelsey Henderson. 2025. Demystifying the Plea Process: Investigating Attorney Communications and
Client Misconceptions. Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law &
Society 26 (1): 16–34. https://doi.org/10.54555/CCJLS.11951.133757.
As the United States has shifted to “a system of pleas,” the role of defense attorneys has swung from trial litigator to plea negotiator. To further investigate how this shift has impacted defense attorneys, we surveyed a nationwide sample (N = 134) to assess the duration and frequency of client meetings, information clients frequently lack and misconceptions they espouse concerning the plea and trial process, and how attorneys convey advice to accept or reject plea offers to clients. The results indicated that defense attorneys spend a significant amount of time meeting with clients (an average of 5.7 meetings for an average of 44.9 minutes). They also cited substantial deficits in criminal defendants’ knowledge of the legal system, as well as many misconceptions regarding legal procedures. Attorneys provided a diversity of responses regarding the most important advice they offer their clients with many mentioning facts related to the case resolution process (56.0%), the direct and collateral consequences associated with a criminal conviction (29.4%), the role of the defense attorney (32.1%), and the importance of the right to silence (24.8%). Further, over half of the attorneys surveyed indicated a general hesitance (54.0%) and others an outright refusal (15.0%) to provide an explicit plea recommendation to their clients. In sum, these findings provide valuable insight into the challenges faced by defense attorneys who must be adviser, negotiator, and apparently, educator. Further, many appear to draw a sharp line between counseling their clients and moving them to a decision.
Reports, Briefs, and Other Resources
Mullen, D. E. (2025). Self-Efficacy, Social Identity, and Meaning Among Women Leaders in Public Service Law: A Phenomenological Exploration (Doctoral dissertation, Marymount University). https://www.proquest.com/openview/0f30ce41f96240cd55be23d39ebaf134/1?cbl=18750&diss=y&pq-origsite=gscholar
This research examined the relationship between self-efficacy, social identity, and leadership progression in the mission driven field of public service law. The review identified themes of internal and external factors influencing self-efficacy, identity formation within the organizational culture, and the impact of meaning and purpose for lawyers choosing to work in public service. Although women have pursued law school in comparable numbers to men, a significant percentage have left the practice before advancing into leadership roles. The current study focused on the experiences women have had and choices they have made in public service law that enabled them to persist and rise to leadership positions. The study used a qualitative phenomenological design to allow participants to share experiences in their own words. Thematic analysis was used to examine the factors influencing the self-efficacy and leadership progression of participants, who were all women leaders in this sector of the legal profession. The potential implications for positive social change stemming from this research include highlighting the work of these women leaders; recognizing the factors that enable them to persist in challenging circumstances; and identifying potential areas of training for current and future women leaders on the value of self-efficacy, social identity, and finding meaning in the workplace.