4 ms·

Further compounding this is the sheer amount of work and cases public defenders have to contend with, they are over whelmed. In New Orleans, they have 50 public

Further compounding this is the sheer amount of work and cases public defenders have to contend with, they are over whelmed. In New Orleans, they have 50 public defenders for 22,000 cases, to the point where they are refusing to represent on certain felony cases. Which means the accused gets to hang out in jail. Article is a quick read and does a good job explaining the mindest of people who plead guilty to crimes they did not commit: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/inside-new-orleans-public-defenders-decision-to-refuse-felony-cases/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/inside-new-orleans-public-defen...

Someone1234 8y ago
This is why you should avoid waiving your right to a speedy trial when you have a public defender. While in THEORY it should give them more time to prepare, more than likely you'll get 20~30 minutes of prep time either way on the day of your trial but spend longer in jail just waiting. If you have a private defender, it might make a lot of sense to waive, since they can use that additional time to assemble enough evidence for either court or a better deal. But in modern US "justice" even if you're innocent expect to take a plea. That's just how it works now.
- defen 8y ago
  > This is why you should avoid waiving your right to a speedy trial when you have a public defender. That makes sense, but there's a coordination problem. If everyone invoked their right to a speedy trial, the system would indeed collapse under its own weight. But the first set of people to use that strategy would be at a disadvantage since their own lawyers would have less time to prepare. Everyone wants to take advantage of this right but no one wants to be the sacrificial lamb, especially since there's not even a guarantee that enough other people will follow suit (your "sacrifice" might really be for naught).
  - Fnoord 8y ago
    Perfect example of large scale prisoner's dilemma (with more than 2 prisoners).
  - horsawlarway 8y ago
    I think his whole point is that the public defender only has time to put in ~30 minutes either way. So why hang out in jail for the days the public defender is just going to spend working on other cases?
  - gamblor956 8y ago
    That makes sense, but there's a coordination problem. If everyone invoked their right to a speedy trial, the system would indeed collapse under its own weight. Yes, and it is glorious...from the perspective of a defense lawyer. Because as soon as the DA realizes they can't just railroad defendants, they start getting realistic about the plea bargains they offer and which cases to triage due to lack of evidence. I've seen it happen before (the entire local defense bar refused to wave speedy trial rights) and the DA held out for about 1.5 days before buckling.
    - defen 8y ago
      In practice, how is a "speedy trial" defined?
- idontpost 8y ago
  By waive do you mean invoke? Because otherwise this makes no sense.
  - xenophonf 8y ago
    You have a right to a speedy trial by default. You can only waive that right, which many people do in order to have more time to build a defense. Someone1234 is saying that people making use of indigent defense resources _should not_ follow that strategy, which is to say that they should _preserve_ their right to a speedy trial. Because indigent defense resources are stretched so thin, delaying your trial to build a defense won't do any good because public defenders will only use the extra time to work on other people's trials. Since you're indigent (poor), you probably can't afford bail or a bondsman, so all that extra prep time that in reality goes toward defending other people involves you sitting in jail. As a result, you'll lose your job plus whatever other resources you have, which makes you even more poor. People end up pleading guilty to crimes they didn't commit just to get out of that vicious cycle.

Someone1234 8y ago

This is why you should avoid waiving your right to a speedy trial when you have a public defender. While in THEORY it should give them more time to prepare, more than likely you'll get 20~30 minutes of prep time either way on the day of your trial but spend longer in jail just waiting. If you have a private defender, it might make a lot of sense to waive, since they can use that additional time to assemble enough evidence for either court or a better deal. But in modern US "justice" even if you're innocent expect to take a plea. That's just how it works now.

defen 8y ago
> This is why you should avoid waiving your right to a speedy trial when you have a public defender. That makes sense, but there's a coordination problem. If everyone invoked their right to a speedy trial, the system would indeed collapse under its own weight. But the first set of people to use that strategy would be at a disadvantage since their own lawyers would have less time to prepare. Everyone wants to take advantage of this right but no one wants to be the sacrificial lamb, especially since there's not even a guarantee that enough other people will follow suit (your "sacrifice" might really be for naught).
- Fnoord 8y ago
  Perfect example of large scale prisoner's dilemma (with more than 2 prisoners).
- horsawlarway 8y ago
  I think his whole point is that the public defender only has time to put in ~30 minutes either way. So why hang out in jail for the days the public defender is just going to spend working on other cases?
- gamblor956 8y ago
  That makes sense, but there's a coordination problem. If everyone invoked their right to a speedy trial, the system would indeed collapse under its own weight. Yes, and it is glorious...from the perspective of a defense lawyer. Because as soon as the DA realizes they can't just railroad defendants, they start getting realistic about the plea bargains they offer and which cases to triage due to lack of evidence. I've seen it happen before (the entire local defense bar refused to wave speedy trial rights) and the DA held out for about 1.5 days before buckling.
  - defen 8y ago
    In practice, how is a "speedy trial" defined?
idontpost 8y ago
By waive do you mean invoke? Because otherwise this makes no sense.
- xenophonf 8y ago
  You have a right to a speedy trial by default. You can only waive that right, which many people do in order to have more time to build a defense. Someone1234 is saying that people making use of indigent defense resources _should not_ follow that strategy, which is to say that they should _preserve_ their right to a speedy trial. Because indigent defense resources are stretched so thin, delaying your trial to build a defense won't do any good because public defenders will only use the extra time to work on other people's trials. Since you're indigent (poor), you probably can't afford bail or a bondsman, so all that extra prep time that in reality goes toward defending other people involves you sitting in jail. As a result, you'll lose your job plus whatever other resources you have, which makes you even more poor. People end up pleading guilty to crimes they didn't commit just to get out of that vicious cycle.