Comments on: Another Brilliant Government Idea

By: Adrian Little

Adrian Little — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 03:40:04 +0000

At least no counties in AZ have draconian, across the board policies that would prevent quickly disposing of weak or minor cases like ‘plead to the charge’. Right? Right?

By: Matt Brown

Matt Brown — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 00:47:10 +0000

As long as there are enough cases to merit keeping the current number on the bench, I think it would be a shame if any county had to lay off a judge. In general, I’m against any cuts that affect the courts’ ability to do their job. Of course, in my opinion, protecting my clients’ rights should be their primary job. I’m probably alone on that.

Anyway, although it wasn’t really my point in posting, one thing that bugs me is the fact that prosecutors have the ability to unclog the courts. They file too many cases, and to my knowledge, no agency has decided to quit filing certain cases to save money. They’d rather use our tax dollars like a blank check and file away. They keep over-charging and let the courts, defense attorneys, and their human resources department deal with it.

I think it’s ridiculous that we pretend not filing certain cases would mean we’re letting people get away with crimes. Prosecutors should prioritize. Since I first began practicing, at all times, a sizable numbers of my clients probably never should have been charged in the first place.

When prosecutors see weak evidence, they should think twice about filing. As long as we let them use their blank check to grand-stand and charge away, we’re always going to be looking for new, more harmful ways to trim the budget.

By: Andrew Becke

Andrew Becke — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:22:32 +0000

I agree with you that it doesn’t seem right that the defense bar is bearing the brunt of the costs here, but…

In discussing matters with our local presiding judge recently, things are desperate at the Superior Court, regardless of what County you are in. Locally, they have had to make an 8% cut immediately and there just aren’t many places to look for savings. If presented with the option of saving postage and investigator costs OR reducing the number of judges (via not using pro tems or eliminating divisions), I think you would agree that it is far more important to have the courthouse open.

In my county, we have a total of six judges (including a pro tem). The loss of one of those would be catastrophic to the rights of defendants in getting timely hearings (which I know are already difficult to get). On balance, I think some additional fees or reductions in reimbursement rates are much less burdensome than the alternative.

Also, while the defense bar shouldn’t bear all of the burden on cost cutting measures, my understanding is that many County Attorneys’ offices are on hiring freezes, so in a sense, they are bearing some of the costs of the down economy as well. Things are tough all over.