WASHINGTON, DC, June 22, 2005 - The National Legal Aid & Defender Association (NLADA) applauds the US Supreme Court decision in Halbert v. Michigan, whereby in a 6-3 decision, the Court struck down a Michigan law that barred state-paid legal help for poor defendants who plead guilty but then want to appeal.

“Today’s Supreme Court decision is a victory for all who support the American value of equal access to justice before the law. The Court has reaffirmed once again that the right to an attorney for people of insufficient means is not a luxury, but a necessity,” stated Jo-Ann Wallace, NLADA’s incoming president and CEO. “We agree with Justice Ginsburg, that the appellate process is a perilous endeavor for any non-lawyer, but especially for the indigent defense client community who often times are undereducated, inarticulate, mentally ill, developmentally delayed, under-aged, and/or suffering from substance abuse.”

In the case of Halbert v. Michigan, Antonio Dwayne Halbert, pleaded no contest in 2001 to two child molestation charges and received up to 30 years in prison. Halbert appealed and requested a state-paid lawyer to assist in the process. He was denied the request based on People v. Bulger, which held that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses do not secure a right to appointed counsel for plea-convicted defendants seeking an appeal. In Halbert v. Michigan, the State held that “pleas constitute a valid waiver of any right to appointed counsel.” In an amicus curiae brief, NLADA argued that “The equal protection violation that arises from the state’s ‘waiver’ theory is identical to, if not more egregious than, that which arises from Michigan’s attempt to legislate away the constitutional right of indigent defendants to appointed appellate counsel in the first instance.”

Justice Ginsberg, in delivering the opinion, agreed: “At the time he entered his plea, Halbert, in common with other defendants convicted on their pleas, had no recognized right to appointed appellate counsel he could elect to forgo… We are unpersuaded by the suggestion that, because a defendant may be able to waive his right to appeal entirely, Michigan can consequently exact from him a waiver of the right to government-funded appellate counsel.”

Justice Ginsberg also refuted the State’s claim that waiving the right to appointed counsel would reduce the workload of the judiciary by pointing out that “providing indigents with appellate counsel” in fact makes it the criminal justice system more efficient, rather than impeding its effectiveness.

Though the Michigan law was unique, seventeen states filed amicus curiae briefs in support of Michigan. Had the court ruled for Michigan, there is no doubt that all of these states, and probably more, would have moved to pass similar laws seriously threatening equal access to the justice system for all. In fact many of the states that currently have troubled indigent defense systems sided with Michigan, including Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Utah and Washington.

# # #

The National Legal Aid & Defender Association (NLADA), founded in 1911, is the oldest and largest national, nonprofit membership organization devoting all of its resources to advocating equal access to justice for all Americans. NLADA champions effective legal assistance for people who cannot afford counsel, serves as a collective voice for both civil legal services and public defense services throughout the nation and provides a wide range of services and benefits to its individual and organizational members.