DIS- 1927
Items For Discussion 2.
Work Session Board of Supervisors1
Board of Supervisors
- Meeting Date:
- 08/04/2014
- Title:
- Amend ARS 11-584 Public Defender Statute
- Submitted By:
- Gussie Motter, Board of Supervisors
- Department:
- Board of Supervisors
Presentation:
No A/V Presentation
Recommendation:
Document Signatures:
# of ORIGINALS
Submitted for Signature:
Submitted for Signature:
NAME
of PRESENTER:
of PRESENTER:
Joel Larson
TITLE
of PRESENTER:
of PRESENTER:
Legal Defender
Mandated Function?:
Source of Mandate
or Basis for Support?:
or Basis for Support?:
Information
Agenda Item Text:
Amend A.R.S. 11-584 (Public Defender Statute) to expressly authorize public defender or similar offices (legal defender, legal advocate) to participate in problem solving courts, such as drug courts, mental health courts, veterans’ courts, and domestic violence court programs.
Background:
The statute currently sets forth the duties of the public defender. It also authorizes the public defender to provide representation in other matters, provided that the board of supervisors notifies the presiding judge that such representations are authorized.
In 1997, the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs established ten key components for the effective operation of drug court programs. These standards have been replicated in other problem solving court models. The second key component cites the nonadversarial participation of prosecution and defense counsel to “promote public safety while protecting participants’ due process rights.”
Drug courts and other problem solving courts are prevalent in Arizona. While each of these programs is unique, all programs should adhere to key components and evidence-based practices to achieve optimum results. By expressly authorizing the Public Defender to participate in problem solving court teams and provide legal representation for participants during court proceedings in A.R.S 11-584, the State of Arizona would be taking an important step toward protecting the rights of problem solving court participants and improving the quality and consistency of program statewide.
In 1997, the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs established ten key components for the effective operation of drug court programs. These standards have been replicated in other problem solving court models. The second key component cites the nonadversarial participation of prosecution and defense counsel to “promote public safety while protecting participants’ due process rights.”
Drug courts and other problem solving courts are prevalent in Arizona. While each of these programs is unique, all programs should adhere to key components and evidence-based practices to achieve optimum results. By expressly authorizing the Public Defender to participate in problem solving court teams and provide legal representation for participants during court proceedings in A.R.S 11-584, the State of Arizona would be taking an important step toward protecting the rights of problem solving court participants and improving the quality and consistency of program statewide.
Department's Next Steps (if approved):
Forward to the County Supervisors Association
Impact of NOT Approving/Alternatives:
Not known at this time
To BOS Staff: Document Disposition/Follow-Up:
Not known at this time