Jon Mosher

Research Associate, Research & Evaluations Division

National Legal Aid & Defender Association (NLADA)


 | Fax:


Jon Mosher - Wed, 02/29/2012 - 11:11

Author/Organization: Jon Mosher, NLADA
Publication Day: 29
Publication Month: 03
Publication Year: 2011
Link: view

National standards for the provision of indigent defense representation provide the best yardstick for measuring the extent to which clients receive the representation guaranteed to them by the Sixth Amendment. (See Standards for the Delivery of Public Defense Services.) These national standards are generally of two types: (1) attorney performance standards, which set out the specifics of what each attorney should do in representing each client; and (2) systemic or structural standards, which establish the specifics of the defense system in which each attorney works. Here we have listed all of the pertinent standards, divided into these two categories. In some instances a single publication addresses both attorney performance and system; in those cases the publication is listed under both categories.

Author/Organization: JSERI
Publication Day:
Publication Month:
Publication Year: 2010
Link: view

A flat-fee contract pays a lawyer a single lump sum to handle an unlimited number of cases.  This type of contract creates a direct financial conflict of interest between the attorney and each client.  Because the lawyer will be paid the same amount, no matter how much or little he works on each case, it is in the lawyer’s personal interest to devote as little time as possible to each appointed case, leaving more time for the lawyer to do other more lucrative work.  Worse yet, many flat-fee contracts require the lawyer to pay all case-related expenses out of the single lump sum.  In this situation, it is in the lawyer’s personal interest to incur as little expense on behalf of clients as possible, so that more of the lump sum payment can go toward the lawyer’s fee.  Finally, some flat-fee contracts require the lawyer to hire other lawyers out of the same single lump sum, such as when an additional lawyer is required to represent a co-defendant or in other conflict case situations.  Such contracts are oriented solely toward capping defense costs at the lowest possible level, without regard to the lawyer’s ethical and constitutional duties to the client.