American Journal of Criminal Justice

, Volume 37, Issue 4, pp 544–561

Is It Legal Representation or Clients? : An Empirical Testing of Clients’ Performance and Their Legal Representation in Tulsa County Drug and DUI Programs

Article

Abstract

The importance of legal representation to a criminal defendant is widely accepted, but the quality of government-provided counsels (particularly public defenders) has continuously been questioned. Based on data from Tulsa County DUI and Drug programs in Oklahoma, the authors tested the impact of legal representation (public defender versus private counsel) on clients’ performance in program, measured by plea terms and program outcome. Initial bivariate analyses showed disparate effect of legal representation, as clients represented by private counsels received better plea terms and fared better in program outcome. This effect, however, disappeared once other variables were controlled. Instead, factors closely related to the clients themselves (e.g., demographic features and their criminal behaviors) significantly impacted their program performance.

Keywords

Legal representation Public defender Private counsel DUI/Drug program 

References

  1. Aalberts, R. J., Boyt, T., & Seidman, L. H. (2002). Public defender’s conundrum: Signaling professionalism and quality in the absence of price. San Diego Law Review, 39, 525–550.Google Scholar
  2. Alpert, G. P. (1979). Inadequate defense counsel: An empirical analysis of prisoners’ perceptions. American Journal of Criminal Law, 7, 1–21.Google Scholar
  3. Beck, J. C., & Shumsky, R. (1997). A comparison of retained and appointed counsel in cases of capital murder. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 525–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bouffard, J., & Taxman, F. (2004). Looking inside the black box of drug court treatment using direct observations. The Journal of Drug Issues, 42(1), 195–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carrington, P. J., & Moyer, S. (1990). The effect of defence counsel on plea and outcome in juvenile court. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 32, 621–637.Google Scholar
  6. Champion, D. J. (1989). Private counsels and public defenders: A look at weak cases, prior records, and leniency in plea bargaining. Journal of Criminal Justice, 17, 253–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clarke, S. H., & Koch, G. G. (1980). Juvenile court: Therapy or crime control, and do lawyers make a difference? Law & Society Review, 14, 263–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Colbert, D. J., Paternoster, R., & Bushway, S. (2002). Do attorneys really matter? The empirical and legal case for the right of counsel at bail. Cardozo Law Review, 23, 1719–1793.Google Scholar
  9. Dixon, J. (1995). The organizational context of criminal sentencing. The American Journal of Sociology, 100, 1157–1198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Duffee, D., & Siegel, L. (1971). The organization man: Legal counsel in the juvenile court. Criminal Law Bulletin, 7, 544–553.Google Scholar
  11. Eibner, C., Morral, A. R., Pacula, R. L., & MacDonald, J. (2006). Is the drug court model exportable? The cost-effectiveness of a driving-under-the-influence court. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 31, 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Erickson, P. (1975). Legalistic and traditional role expectations for defence counsel in juvenile court. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 17, 78–93.Google Scholar
  13. Faller, K. C., Birdsall, W. C., Vandevort, F., & Henry, J. (2006). Can the punishment fit the crime when suspects confess child sexual abuse? Child Abuse & Neglect, 30, 815–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ferster, E. Z., & Courtless, T. F. (1972). Pre-dispositional data, role of counsel and decisions in a juvenile court. Law and Society Review, 7, 195–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ferster, E. Z., Courtless, T. F., & Snethen, E. N. (1970–71). The juvenile justice system: In search of the role of counsel. Fordham Law Review, 39, 375–412.Google Scholar
  16. Gitelman, M. (1971). The relative performance of appointed and retained counsel in Arkansas felony cases—An empirical study. Arkansas Law Review, 24, 442–452.Google Scholar
  17. Goldkamp, J., White, M., & Robinson, J. (2001a). Do drug courts work? Getting inside the drug court black box. Journal of Drug Issues, 31(1), 27–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Goldkamp, J., White, M. D., & Robinson, J. B. (2001b). Context and change: The evolution of pioneering drug courts in Portland and Las Vegas (1991–1998). Law and Policy, 23(2), 141–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Guevara, L. A. (2001). Legal representation in the juvenile court: The interaction of race and counsel on juvenile court outcomes. Ph.D. dissertation, Omaha: Department of Criminal Justice, University of Nebraska.Google Scholar
  20. Guevara, L. A., Spohn, C., & Herz, D. (2004). Race, legal representation, and juvenile justice: Issues and concerns. Crime & Delinquency, 50, 344–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hill, E. (2005). Does the type of legal representation affect sentencing outcomes? Paper Presented, Oberlin College Honors Seminar in Economics, 2004–2005.Google Scholar
  22. Kelly, H. E. (1976). A comparison of defense strategy and race as influences in differential sentencing. Criminology, 14, 24–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Levine, J. P. (1975). The impact of “Gideon”: The performance of public & private criminal defense lawyers. Polity, 8, 215–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Long, J. S. (1997). Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  25. Mantel, B. (2008). Public defenders: Do indigent defendants get adequate legal representation? CQ Researcher, 18, 339–356.Google Scholar
  26. Nagel, S. S. (1973). Effects of alternative types of counsel on criminal procedure treatment. Indiana Law Journal, 48, 404–426.Google Scholar
  27. Nardulli, P. F. (1986). “Insider” justice: Defense attorneys and the handling of felony cases. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 77, 379–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Redick, W. P., Jr., MacLean, B. A., & Truett, M. S. (2008). Pretend justice—defense representation in Tennessee death penalty cases. The University of Memphis Law Review, 38, 303–463.Google Scholar
  29. Stover, R. V., & Eckart, D. R. (1975). A systematic comparison of public defenders and private attorneys. American Journal of Criminal Law, 3, 265–300.Google Scholar
  30. Sudnow, D. (1965). Normal crimes: Sociological features of the penal code in a public defender office. Social Problems, 12, 255–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Taylor, J. G., Stanley, T. P., DeFlorio, B. J., & Seekamp, L. N. (1972). An analysis of defense counsel in the processing of felony defendants in San Diego, California. Denver Law Journal, 49, 233–275.Google Scholar
  32. Taylor, J. G., Stanley, T. P., DeFlorio, B. J., & Seekamp, L. N. (1973). An analysis of defense counsel in the processing of felony defendants in Denver, Colorado. Denver Law Journal, 50, 9–43.Google Scholar
  33. Vinson, T. (1972). Research bulletin: Legal representation and outcome. Sydney, Australia: Department of the Attorney General and of Justice NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research.Google Scholar
  34. Wheeler, G. R., & Wheeler, C. L. (1980). Reflections on legal representation of the economically disadvantaged: Beyond assembly line justice. Crime & Delinquency, 26(3), 319–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Williams, J. J. (1995). Type of counsel and the outcome of criminal appeals: A research note. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 19, 275–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Williams, M. R. (2002). A comparison of sentencing outcomes for defendants with public defenders versus retained counsel in a Florida circuit court. The Justice System Journal, 23, 249–25.Google Scholar
  37. Willison, D. (1984). The effects of counsel on the severity of criminal sentences: A statistical assessment. The Justice System Journal, 9, 87–101.Google Scholar

Cases and Statutes Cited

  1. Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25 (1972)Google Scholar
  2. Gideon v. Wainright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963)Google Scholar
  3. In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967)Google Scholar
  4. Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932)Google Scholar
  5. U.S. Constitution, Sixth Amendment Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Southern Criminal Justice Association 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyOklahoma State University–TulsaTulsaUSA
  2. 2.Department of SociologyOklahoma State UniversityStillwaterUSA
  3. 3.Department of Sociology and Criminal JusticeBriar Cliff UniversitySioux CityUSA

Personalised recommendations