Notable Recent Publications, October 2025
Articles
Caliman, C. R., & Berryessa, C. M. (2025). Legal Defense of Autistic Defendants in the US: A Qualitative Analysis of the Experiences of Legal Professionals. Forthcoming in Journal of Social Issues.
Autistic individuals encounter distinct barriers within the criminal-legal system, such as misinterpretations of their behaviors, a lack of accommodations, and systemic biases. Despite growing understanding of these challenges, research on how defense attorneys understand and advocate for autistic clients remains limited. This study explores how defense attorneys in the United States conceptualize autism and apply neurodiversity-informed strategies in their advocacy. Semi-structured interviews with 31 defense attorneys revealed that while most attorneys view autism through a medicalized lens, they acknowledge the need for better strategies to secure accommodations in court. Findings suggest that attorneys often rely on expert testimony and recognize the courtroom as primarily designed for neurotypical individuals. Gaps in training and understanding about neurodiversity may hinder effective defense strategies and limit access to justice for autistic defendants. This research highlights the urgent need for enhanced legal training and systemic reform to improve representation and legal experiences for autistic individuals.
Cheong, I., Liu, P., Stammbach, D., & Henderson, P. (2025). How Can AI Augment Access to Justice? Public Defenders' Perspectives on AI Adoption. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.22933.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2510.22933
Public defenders are asked to do more with less: representing clients deserving of adequate counsel while facing overwhelming caseloads and scarce resources. While artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) are promoted as tools to alleviate this burden, such proposals are detached from the lived realities of public defenders. This study addresses that gap through semi-structured interviews with fourteen practitioners across the United States to examine their experiences with AI, anticipated applications, and ethical concerns. We find that AI adoption is constrained by costs, restrictive office norms, confidentiality risks, and unsatisfactory tool quality. To clarify where AI can and cannot contribute, we propose a task-level map of public defense. Public defenders view AI as most useful for evidence investigation to analyze overwhelming amounts of digital records, with narrower roles in legal research & writing, and client communication. Courtroom representation and defense strategy are considered least compatible with AI assistance, as they depend on contextual judgment and trust. Public defenders emphasize safeguards for responsible use, including mandatory human verification, limits on overreliance, and the preservation of relational aspect of lawyering. Building on these findings, we outline a research agenda that promotes equitable access to justice by prioritizing open-source models, domain-specific datasets and evaluation, and participatory design that incorporates defenders’ perspectives into system development.
Lee, J. G., Jaynes, C. M., & Franklin, S. (2025). How defense attorney race, sex, and quality shape the guilty plea process. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1-27.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11292-025-09698-1
This study aimed to explore how clients view their defense attorneys and how attorneys shape clients’ plea decisions. Using an experimental vignette design with randomized photos of defense attorneys, we manipulated attorney (1) race, (2) sex, and (3) type (public or private) to investigate how these characteristics, as well as client perceptions of their attorney, influenced willingness to accept a plea (WTAP). Respondents reported that Black attorneys were more trustworthy, intelligent, and harder working than their White counterparts. Female attorneys were similarly more positively perceived relative to male attorneys. Results also indicated higher WTAP for clients of Black attorneys, especially Black-female attorneys. We observed no significant interactions between client and attorney race/sex, though this may be influenced by small cell sizes in a few categories. Results suggest that clients are making quick judgments about their lawyers that impact the plea decision, and exactly how these judgments are formed is a topic worthy of future research.
Vieira, G. G., & Gomes, A. O. (2025). Performance of Public Defender’s Offices: Dimensions, Indicators and Associated Factors. Revista Direito GV, 21, e2531.
https://www.scielo.br/j/rdgv/a/TSMdP4PhJNGmbvDPxk8B73h/?lang=en
Public defender’s offices are institutions that work to guarantee access to justice through legal assistance, promote human rights and offer legal aid to vulnerable populations. Evaluating the performance of public defender’s offices is a complex task, but it is necessary to ensure adequate provision of the services offered and to provide greater benefits to the service users. This research aimed to identify the performance of public defenders and public defender’s offices, how it is measured and the factors associated with this performance. To this end, a review of scientific studies was carried out using the PRISMA protocol. The results allowed the systematization of indicators and factors associated with the performance of the two dominant dimensions of public defender’s offices: internal output and user satisfaction. Each dimension was categorized in relation to the different groups, with institutional, individual, subjective and objective perspectives. Next, all the indicators used in the literature to measure the performance of public defenders and public defender’s offices were presented and discussed. Finally, the research presents the explanatory factors associated with performance. The paper highlights the main theoretical, managerial and social contributions of the reviewed studies and offers a research agenda for future studies on the topic.
Reports, Briefs, and Other Resources
Brink, M., et. al., California Public Defense Workloads and Staffing, Deason Criminal Justice Reform Center (September 2025).
Link: https://scholar.smu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1018&context=deasoncenter
In 2023, The California Office of State Public Defender (OSPD) selected the Deason Criminal Justice Reform Center at the SMU Dedman School of Law (Deason Center) to conduct this study. [This] study document existing public defense conditions, assess those conditions against ethical rules and practice standards, and recommend how public defense providers should be staffed to meet modern workload demands. With the Advisory Group’s input, the Deason Center conducted comprehensive site visits in nine California counties. The Center team observed court proceedings and program operations, and conducted interviews with public defense providers, including supervising lawyers, trial attorneys, non-trial attorneys, investigators, social workers, administrative assistants, and other support staff. The Center also met with court personnel, county administrators, and criminal justice reform advocates. The Deason Center also conducted focus groups with public defense providers, former clients, and client family members. Finally, the Deason Center surveyed chief public defenders regarding their current staffing, staffing sufficiency, data collection capacity, and existing attorney workload analyses. Based on this information, the Deason Center prepared this report to provide the California Legislature with critical information about public defense workloads and recommendations to ensure that all those accused of crime in California are able to receive the effective assistance of counsel required by the Sixth Amendment.
If you have suggestions, ideas for work that should be included, or trouble accessing any of the articles featured, please email Venita Embry at vembry.embry@gmail.com.
