Indigent Defense

Within the criminal justice system, officials abuse their power. The officials of the justice system have a duty to protect and perform their duties with unbiased decision making. The abuse of power jeopardizes people’s lives who are not able to sustain oneself and their families. Some people do not understand that poorer people find themselves in jail more and once a person is released, that person is subjected to return to jail for the amount of money owed to the state. There are many obstacles for the poor, especially those of color. People of color are treated unfairly in the justice system, from the arrest, the sentencing, and the release. The criminal justice system is supposed to be just but that is not the case. The criminal justice system allows for the police, public defenders, and judges to bend the laws and not be punished for their actions or that apologizes can fix the wrong that has been done. This paper will discuss the abuse of power from the justice system and the solutions to rectify the damages.

The basis of criminal justice in the United States is one founded on both the rights of the individual and the democratic order of the people. Evinced through the myriad forms whereby liberty and equity marry into the mores of society to form the ethos of a people. However, these two systems of justice are rife with conflicts too. With the challenges of determining prevailing worth in public order and individual rights coming down to the best service of justice for society. Bearing a perpetual eye to their manifestations by the truth of how "the trade-off between freedom and security, so often proposed so seductively, very often leads to the loss of both" (Hitchens, 2003, para. 5).

American prison systems encompass all three spheres of criminal justice: law enforcement, judiciary, corrections. Within this system, a massive problem exists. America is known as the “mass incarceration nation” (Hamilton, 2014, p. 1271). Comparatively, the United States encompasses the majority of global prisoners, yet the population is nowhere near that proportion. Just how “free and equal” is this system? Since Gideon v. Wainwright, the racial divide in the criminal justice system has grown, which is contradictory to its intentions. The American criminal justice system has failed to provide the justice and protections it promises. There are many injustices caused by the mass incarceration of American citizens, especially those of minority descent. More harm is done by incarceration to the individual, their community, and the nation, than if other forms of justice were used. The criminal justice system is divided, with racial and income disparities defining the nation in way never intended.

Mass Incarceration is a growing dilemma in the United States that populates our prisons at an alarming rate. Michelle Alexander is a professor at Ohio State University and a graduate of Stanford law school. She states in her award winning book, The new Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness “In less than thirty years, the U.S. penal population exploded from around 300,000 to more than 2 million” (Alexander, 6). These young men and women are unable to afford a decent lawyer because they come from such a poverty-stricken background. Men and women are at a financial disadvantage in our justice system. Lawyers and attorneys cost a fortune and most people can just simply not afford them. Others plead to their charges because

In his book, Just Mercy, Bryan Stevenson writes of cases where the defendant was wrongfully condemned because their attorney did not do their job correctly. In some cases, this behavior extended past the original trial, all the way through any appeals available to the client. Stevenson continues by discussing how the trials were either clearly biased, or evidence was blatantly ignored. Yet often, the attorney either submitted a brief attesting to no appeal, or simply neglected to file an appeal by the deadline. Their clients not only did not receive the fair trial that our constitution mandates, but also lost any chance to take advantage of the fail-safes that were built into the legal system. When these ineffective defenders were eventually disbarred, no investigations were launched to revisit their past cases in search of legal malpractice. Instead, any cases directly impacted by their conduct were left as they were- with unfairly convicted people sitting behind bars. While the Equal Justice Initiative does what it can to help find justice for people who deserve it, they must be contacted by, or on behalf of, the victim of injustice. There are few programs to help individuals with mental illness or those without knowledge of the initiative, even though these are the people who need guidance the most.

Courts play a vital role in the Criminal Justice System in America, however; understanding how the courts work and function is essential. Even the general public should have a basic knowledge regarding the similarities and differences of the jurisdiction and structure of our dual court system – federal and state. In addition, there are ethical and diversity issues that can be experienced by each of the courts that could possibly impact the courts’ functioning.

I’ve chosen to write my reflection over chapter 4 of Bryan Stevenson’s Just Mercy. This chapter involves the aftermath of the successful opening of Stevenson’s and Ansley’s “Equal Justice Initiative” and their relations with their new clients, particularly, Herbert Richardson. The chapter follows these clients’ cases, most of them being unsuccessful, and the unjust practices in the judicial system that cause these failures. This chapter holds significance to me because it was one of the first times while reading that the book managed to strongly affect me emotionally and relate to me on a personal level.

The American criminal justice system has been augmented since its founding with more stress on individual rights and increased requirements on those in the field of the administration of justice, including plaintiffs’

(Birmingham, Alabama) One of only a few states in the nation that fails to provide a statewide indigent defender program, Alabama also lacks post-conviction counsel for those inmates on death row. Clayton Tartt, an associate with Birmingham's Parkman White, LLP, a birmingham criminal defense firm, feels this is a critical flaw in the state's judicial system and works to provide representation to those who otherwise cannot afford it. Mr. Tartt volunteers with the Alabama Post-Conviction Relief Project to help individuals in this situation. Cody Owens of Weld Magazine recently interviewed Mr. Tartt about this issue.

In the United States, the adversarial system of justice relies on ensuring a criminal defendant receives a fair trial. The sixth amendment gives defendants the right to legal representation in criminal trials even if they cannot afford one themselves. Each city and county in the United States ensures a defendant the right to counsel. There are different ways cities and counties across the United States provide representation for indigent defendants. One such approach to indigent defense is public defender programs and is a popular system used by many states today. Public defender programs have been around since the 1900’s but gained popularity throughout the years due to the many indigent defense cases.

His article, “Putting a Price on Justice,” displays the rates and statistics of the elevated incarceration rates. Johnson Lero correlates the statistics with the increased cost of America’s prison system. He argues that there are numerous solutions to decrease both the cost and rates. There are many prisoners incarcerated that are nonviolent and are facing charges just like a violent prisoner. Lero states that this is happening because most judges, who do not pay for prison, are elected in office and avoid taking any risks that can harm their reelection. The judges conclude to send any possible threats to prison. The judges also do not pay for prison and Lero presents a solution that if each county had to pay for the prison, the nonviolent criminals could face other charges than being imprisoned. With less individuals being incarcerated creates a lower cost for prison. Johnson Lero’s article is useful for a research paper through the use of presenting issues with our current prison system and creating other solutions that can be beneficial to everyone. This article is also useful to support an argument in contradiction of America’s prison

Everyday people around the nation are brought to trial. The litigants may or may not have sufficient resources, but are still entitled to a fair trial under the Sixth Amendment. Clarence Earl Gideon was accused of felony by the state of Florida and did not have the money for attorney representation. Instead, Gideon had to approach the Florida court system blinded by the rules of litigation and unaware of the processes of making an argument. He was helpless and could not win the battle, eventually being sentenced to five years in prison. In America, people are supposed to be treated equal in the eyes of the law, yet Gideon’s circumstance was unjust. As he ultimately reached the Supreme Court of the United States, Gideon was given an

The goal of state compensation statutes is to provide a consistent, dependable approach to financial assistance. The structure consists of a wrongfully convicted individual receiving a specific amount of money for every year that he or she was imprisoned, and these statutes are meant to be blind to factors such as gender, race, political connections, and visibility of the case. The problem currently, however, is that there are still 18 states that do not have any form of compensation statute in place, such was the case of Lamonte McIntyre, and many more make it difficult for exonerees to actually quality for the benefits of their state’s statute. The federal government recognizes the need for uniform compensation, as demonstrated by its passing

Over the years, the Supreme Court has changed along with the situations and controversies of the time period. The interpretations and connotations of many amendments and constitutional clauses have grown and evolved throughout history, and it is the job of the justice system to adapt to match these changes. As different situations and scenarios have presented themselves, the justices of the Supreme Court have wrestled with moral, judicial, legal, and societal reasons to make decisions regarding the rights of the accused. In many situations, there is not always a clear-cut divide between right and wrong. This provides various challenges for the court system, as its members are forced to make decisions based on a plethora of justifications.

In this discussion question I will talk about criminal defenses. I have gotten important information from Module II, that explains deeply about alibi, justification, self-defense, excuse, and procedural. Alibi is any evidence that a defendant presents to authorities to prove his or her innocence because of absence at the time of crime. For example, if a defendant is at a restaurant when the crime occurred, the defendant can show proves like any surveillance videos or receipts by date and time may prove his or her innocence. Justification means that the defendant will not be held liable for conduct that is justifies. For example, there are five main types of justification. The first one is necessary which means the defendant may assert a defense