Abstract
In Houston, Texas, court-appointed attorneys represent indigent criminal defendants. Are defendants with court-appointed attorneys more likely to receive a punitive disposition (conviction versus nonconviction; a prison sentence rather than probation or a fine) than defendants represented by private, retained counsel? Five hundred and eighty-six defendants were selected at the time of charge and followed for one year or until their cases were disposed. When charge and previous convictions were controlled, court-appointed attorneys and private counsel appeared to be equally successful in obtaining nonconvictions for their clients. Although private attorneys obtained nonprison dispositions more often than court-appointed attorneys did, the differences disappeared when pretrial status was controlled. The data suggest several trends in the Houston courts. Some low-income defendants appeared to be boycotting court-appointed counsel. Pretrial detention was the most significant factor in case disposition. Some defendants detained in jail before trial were there apparently because of ineffective counsel. While the type of attorney did not seem to be signifi cant, advocacy-oriented counsel working to ensure bonding of appropriate defendants is recommended as a means of improving justice in Houston.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.