subject: Legal Services for the Poor, a Lawyer's Burden [print this page] Legal Services for the Poor, a Lawyer's Burden
Fighting for a new state system that is fair to lawyers from both urban and rural areas, this attorney marked the current state system for lawyer's compensation in representing indigent clients as unconstitutional. According to this lawyer, requiring attorney to pay for the defense services of these citizens who cannot afford these services is really unfair. How the justices reacted and what they asked made it seem as if he got their vote of sympathy.
In places where public defender's offices don't exist and there is a lack of lawyers, the compensation problem is very apparent. Judges end up with the obligation to arrange defense systems for the indigent and also to give lawyers their cases. The legal profession is not responsible for giving indigent criminals a fair trial and defense because these are the responsibilities of the state.
Are lawyers entitled to any constitutional rights? Only lawyers are required by the state to give their time and money to the indigent people without being paid appropriately. If lawyers have to pay to provide services for the poor, then doctors, plumbers, and architects should do the same.
It is an attorney's moral and ethical duty to represent a client, no matter how much compensation is received. Payment to attorneys for public defender work is not a constitutional duty of the state. Representation is a moral and ethical obligation of the legal profession in the state of Kansas.
I will say that lawyers are probably running out of money by defending indigent clients. Under the law, attorneys are obligated to take indigent cases, though I am sympathetic about the compensation problem. Profiting from representing indigent clients is not a constitutional right of an attorney.
One attorney said he recognizes his obligation to help the poor, as long as it doesn't reach the point that it creates serious economic problems from himself. The budget of the public defender's offices remained the same even if private attorneys were paid a lesser amount during a financial crisis, a justice pointed out.
The old federal system where attorneys provided legal representation without any form of compensation worked the same way too, observed the justice. The federal system for public defenders is now in existence.
The accused should be given enough legal representation by an attorney, but the attorney may be restricted in doing so because of the unfair treatment he receives in having to pay for his client's legal services. There will then be a toss up between the situation of your finances or your client's constitutional rights. A fair trial will be denied the defendants, denying them of their constitutional rights.
Representing someone used to be an honor. Then there was an explosion in this thing and it was expanded from free legal counsel for felonies to include misdemeanors, care and treatment cases, juvenile and probate. The system is bound to fail. It wouldn't bother me to do some free work from time to time. This situation is now unstable.
