logo
State commission, lawmakers declare ‘all hands on deck' effort to address indigent defense crisis

State commission, lawmakers declare ‘all hands on deck' effort to address indigent defense crisis

Yahoo04-04-2025
(Photo by)
Maine lawmakers and the state's public defense commission are racing to confront a growing constitutional crisis as almost 90 indigent defendants remain jailed without legal representation. With a court-ordered deadline looming, officials are backing a multi-pronged plan to recruit more attorneys and reduce the backlog of unrepresented clients.
After years of Maine failing to provide timely counsel to defendants who can't afford an attorney, the Kennebec County Superior Court ruled last month that the state must create a plan by April 3 to end what it described as a constitutional crisis. It also agreed to a request from the American Civil Liberties Union of Maine to start releasing defendants who have been waiting for counsel from incarceration if the state fails to provide representation.
The ACLU of Maine has argued since 2022 that the state is in violation of the Sixth Amendment, which declares the right to a speedy and public trial and legal counsel, among other provisions.
With that deadline looming, the Maine Commission on Public Defense Services released its proposal Thursday, which includes immediate remedies such as better coordination with courts to keep an updated list of all defendants in need of an attorney, increased incentives for private and public attorneys to take on cases, and an appeal to district attorneys and the Maine Attorney General's office to reconsider pursuing lower-level offenses, such as charges for drug possession or violating conditions of release (which make up the vast majority of charges).
As part of its long-term solutions, the commission also referenced a bill (LD 1101) passed by the Maine Legislature's Judiciary Committee this week that would add five new positions within the public defenders offices..
Zach Heiden from the ACLU said at the public hearing on the bill that while it was critical in bolstering the state's public defenders offices, it was not enough.
On Monday, the Kennebec County Superior Court will start setting dates to determine if people should be released, and what the conditions of release should be (for example, an ankle monitor, limits to travel, drug testing, etc.)
Individuals who have been incarcerated for more than 14 days without counsel are eligible and if the judge decides a person should be released, the state will get another seven days to find an attorney before that actually happens, so a person could technically be incarcerated for a minimum of 21 days before release, according to the ACLU.
During the March 19 public hearing, Judiciary Committee co-chair Sen. Anne Carney (D-Cumberland), who introduced the emergency legislation, described the need to urgently address the indigent defense crisis in Maine as an 'all hands on deck situation.'
'I think there are two really big things at stake. One is the Sixth Amendment rights of these people who have been incarcerated, some of them for a very long time, without representation' she said.
'And the other thing at stake is really the rights of Mainers to live in a safe community. And in some instances, there are people who could be released from incarceration who would present a public safety threat.'
As an emergency measure, the bill will need the support of two-thirds of the Legislature to pass and immediately take effect. In the amended version that the committee unanimously supported, it would cost the state $3,341,394 over three years — $254,860 in FY2024-25, $1,533,828 in FY2025-26 and $1,552,706 in FY2026-27.
'We have an actual crisis on our hands. And this is a very important piece of legislation that plugs a lot of those holes, maybe not perfectly …but we'll address a very important situation,' said Rep. Rachel Henderson (R- Rumford).
'This is not something that's possible without true bipartisan efforts and support.'
The number of adult criminal defendants waiting for state-appointed counsel exceeded 1,000 last December. According to the public defense commission, it fell 487 as of April 2 due to a combination of public defender offices and private attorneys taking cases off the list.
In response to the court's requirements, the commission is proposing a strategy to reduce the number of unrepresented defendants and improve access to indigent legal services statewide. Some short-term solutions the state proposed includes direct outreach to recruit more qualified private attorneys, expanding law student internships and externships within public defenders' offices, and developing a real-time shared system with court clerks to streamline and coordinate case assignments.
To encourage attorneys to return to court rosters, the commission is proposing a five-case daily cap 'since many attorneys state as a reason for not going on rosters for the fear that they will be assigned 20, 30 or more cases in a few days,' according to the document. The commission is also proposing reinstating geographic limits to prevent attorneys from taking on cases in multiple counties and having to travel.
On March 25, Jim Billings, executive director of the commission, sent a letter to all district attorneys' offices as well as the Maine Attorney General, urging them to reexamine charging decisions for lower-level offenses — such as drug possession, driving offenses, and violations of conditions of release.
The letter asked prosecutors to evaluate each of their cases to ensure they can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and in cases where there are challenges with proof, missing witnesses, or other issues, to consider dismissing those.
The letter noted that nearly 90 defendants remain jailed without legal representation.
'I do not make the suggestions in this letter lightly. No one wants us to be in this situation,' Billings wrote. 'This is a constitutional crisis, but if we work together where possible to prioritize resources and make tough decisions, we can improve the way the criminal justice system is currently functioning in Maine.'
Another proposal being considered by the Legislature this session, LD 179, would help address the issue by removing from the bail code a charge if someone violates their condition of release. Maine is one of only six states that charges people with a separate crime for violating their conditions of release. In 2024 alone, there were over 5,400 such charges filed in Maine courts, according to Frayla Tarpinian, a former prosecutor who oversees Maine's first brick-and-mortar public defender office. To compare, the second most common type of charge was 662 cases of drug possession, she said.
Maine's current law is an example of excessive punishment, according to Abbe Smith, a Georgetown University law professor and director of the Criminal Defense and Prisoner Advocacy Clinic.
The ACLU did not comment on the commission's plan, but will respond during a Monday hearing.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

ACLU of Delaware asks Ocean View to repeal new legislation regulating public assemblies
ACLU of Delaware asks Ocean View to repeal new legislation regulating public assemblies

Yahoo

time8 hours ago

  • Yahoo

ACLU of Delaware asks Ocean View to repeal new legislation regulating public assemblies

The ACLU of Delaware is asking Ocean View Town Council to repeal a recently passed ordinance regulating certain gatherings, claiming the new law violates the First Amendment, which protects the right to assemble. The ordinance, which passed on July 8, establishes guidelines and a permitting process for First Amendment assemblies in town parks and town-owned property. Ocean View Town Manager Carol Houck said they appreciate the information provided in the ACLU's letter and intend to quickly review the points raised with the town's solicitor. The new law "recognizes and respects the rights of individuals to engage in peaceful First Amendment activities," according to the town's website. More: Fully treated wastewater is leaking continuously near Ocean View. Find out where The town, however, seeks to "ensure that such activities are conducted in a manner that protects public safety, minimizes disruptions to the community and preserves the rights and freedoms of all citizens." The new legislation also said the town has a "compelling interest in regulating the time, place and manner of First Amendment assemblies" to ensure public safety, protect public and private property and maintain public order. "This ordinance is an obvious and unconstitutional attempt to silence protesters by creating burdensome restrictions on their speech and assembly," ACLU-DE legal fellow Jared Silberglied said in a statement. "Introducing administrative hoops for people to jump through, on top of financial obligations with vague fees, is not honoring the First Amendment rights of the people of Ocean View. People should be able to express themselves publicly without this kind of interference." According to the ACLU, whose letter requesting the ordinance's repeal was dated Aug. 20, the new regulations require organizers to: Apply for a permit no less than 36 hours before any event with more than 10 people. Pay up to $150 in fees. Be subject to unspecified restrictions determined by the town manager. "First Amendment assemblies" must be between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. and participants are prohibited from wearing masks. The ACLU went on to explain how the new regulations violate free speech, including providing the example of how a 36-hour notice – with no exception – limits the public's ability to respond to fast-breaking news and current events. There is also long-standing U.S. Supreme Court precedent protecting the right of protesters to maintain their privacy and anonymity by wearing face coverings or masks, the ACLU said in its statement. Send tips or story ideas to Esteban Parra at (302) 324-2299 or eparra@ This article originally appeared on Delaware News Journal: ACLU asks Ocean View to repeal legislation regulating assemblies Solve the daily Crossword

How Stanislaus County could be affected by California's redistricting standoff
How Stanislaus County could be affected by California's redistricting standoff

Yahoo

time14 hours ago

  • Yahoo

How Stanislaus County could be affected by California's redistricting standoff

How Stanislaus County could be affected by California's redistricting standoff Stanislaus County is among the areas affected by the potential California redistricting – moving places that were 'toss-ups' in the last election into solidly blue territory. Gov. Gavin Newsom has called for a special election to authorize mid-decade congressional redistricting in direct retaliation to Texas doing the same. 'We're doing it in reaction to a president of the United States that called a sitting governor and said, 'Find me five seats,' Newsom said in an Aug. 14 news conference. Under normal circumstances, California redistricts once every 10 years through an independent commission based on the most recent census. 'The only reason Texas is changing the rules now is because President Trump believes that his party can't win under our current system,' Rep. Adam Gray, D-Merced, told The Modesto Bee. 'It's difficult to take my colleagues across the aisle seriously when they crow about election rigging and deep state plots and then turn around and do things like what we're seeing in Texas. It's unserious and it's damaging to our democracy.' Drawing maps to favor one party over another is 'gerrymandering.' Both Texas and California at this point are being transparent about the intent to redistrict to concentrate the power of one party over another. In California, unlike in Texas, the departure from the decade-by-decade system would require a special election to authorize the action Nov. 4. The proposed remapping would benefit some Democrats, such as Gray, who won the District 13 seat last year with just 187 votes. He would gain a larger section of central Stockton – part of Josh Harder's District 9 – and would add Salida and a portion of central Modesto. Harder would lose those sections of Stockton but gain the community of Antioch closer to the Bay Area. Republican Rep. Tom McClintock's District 5 would remain a heavily red area and expand to the east. Locally, he would lose a section of central Modesto and gain Escalon and the northern section of the town of Empire. Both Harder and McClintock did not respond to a request for comment. Newsom said the decision to redistrict would be temporary and limited. 'We will affirm our commitment to the state's redistricting committee for the 2030 census, but we're asking the voters to consent to do midterm redistricting in 2026, 2028 and 2030 for congressional maps to respond to what's happening in Texas, to respond to what Trump is trying to incite,' the governor said. The ACLU previously has argued that gerrymandering hinders the ability of voters to choose their politicians and instead allows politicians to choose their voters. Arguments to that effect were made as dozens of Democrats in the Texas Legislature walked out to prevent a House quorum from forming for a period of two weeks. They've since returned to Texas, some under duress. Redistricting is described in Article 1 Section 2 of the Constitution. Each state handles its redistricting efforts differently. In Texas, for example, redistricting is run by the state Legislature. But the general basis of each state having at least one representative and apportioning the regions by population is the same. California's Citizen Redistricting Commission independent committee was given the task of drawing congressional maps in 2010. It is composed of active voters whose party affiliation has not changed in five years. At least one state office-holder who represents Stanislaus County residents, District 22 Assemblymember Juan Alanis, is against the push for redistricting. The Republican said in part in a statement: 'My colleagues in the majority are undermining the principles of representative democracy and the clear will of California voters, who do not want elected politicians to draw the lines in this state. I will not be supporting any of these shameful retaliatory mid-decade redistricting bills, and I urge both California and Texas to stop playing gerrymandering games and start putting the people first.' On Aug. 19, the California Republican Party petitioned the state Supreme Court to issue an emergency stay on the call for a special election. Stanislaus County Registrar of Voters Donna Linder said that if the plan moves ahead, voters would have a one-item ballot, which they could cast beginning Oct. 25. The deadline for the Legislature to decide if California will move forward with the planned redistricting is Aug. 22. There is a public comment period open for voters to share their thoughts on the proposition. Solve the daily Crossword

Adams joins legal fight over ICE courthouse arrests
Adams joins legal fight over ICE courthouse arrests

Yahoo

timea day ago

  • Yahoo

Adams joins legal fight over ICE courthouse arrests

(The Center Square) — New York City Mayor Eric Adams has joined a legal challenge against the Trump administration's policy of arresting undocumented immigrants at city courthouses. The city's Legal Department has filed a legal brief in support of a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups that asks a federal judge to block Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials from detaining immigrants who show up for scheduled hearings at a Lower Manhattan federal immigration building. Adams, a Democrat who has been criticized for backing Trump administration immigration policies, called the arrests "illegal" and said they have driven many "law-abiding" immigrants to avoid courts, the police and other basic city services for fear of detention. "From my first days as a rookie cop to my current role as mayor of New York City, my job is, and has always been, to keep law-abiding New Yorkers safe," Adams said in a statement. "We should allow New Yorkers to feel secure to attend legal proceedings in their pursuit to obtain legal status." Immigration enforcement actions in courthouses have been a flashpoint in pushback by Democrats and civil liberty groups to Trump's administration's immigration enforcement. To enter America from another country, if not a U.S. citizen, a visa or some other travel authorization is required to be presented at a port of entry. Advocates, court officials and even some judges have been accused of resisting attempts by ICE to apprehend suspects who show up for court hearings. New York City Comptroller Brad Lander, a Democrat who was then seeking the Democratic nomination to run for mayor, was arrested in June for allegedly assaulting a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent who was attempting to take an undocumented immigrant in a New York City courthouse into custody. He was let go when Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul showed up at the ICE detention facility to demand his release. The Justice Department sued New York state in February over a state law that limits state cooperation with federal immigration authorities and again in June over the Protect Our Courts Act, which the DOJ said "shields dangerous aliens from being lawfully detained" and violates the Constitution by obstructing federal immigration operations. Those cases are still pending. In another lawsuit, the DOJ took New York City to federal court in July over its "sanctuary" policies that restrict cooperation with federal immigration crackdowns, accusing the city of shielding wanted criminals from deportation.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store