Public safety advocates warn of effort to reduce public defender caseloads

(The Center Square) — The Washington Supreme Court is considering dramatic changes to standards that impact caseloads for public defenders.

For years, trial courts have been overwhelmed trying to handle cases both from the prosecutorial side and public defense.

During a Wednesday hearing in Olympia, those for and against new standards for public defenders in caseload volume made arguments before the high court's justices.

Terra Nevitt, executive director of the Washington State Bar Association, told the court low pay is one of the main reasons for turnover among public defenders.

“High caseloads and low compensation leads to burnout, which in turn leads to attrition, which then leads to higher caseloads and the cycle continues,” she explained. “As of July 2024, there were 26,395 attorneys licensed to practice in the state."

Steve Strachan, executive director of the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs, told The Center Square that WSBA recommendations to the court are dangerous.

“The defense attorneys went to the state bar and said they should only have to handle one-third of the cases they currently do,” he explained.

In March, WSBA recommended new maximums for a public defender of no more than 47 felony or 120 misdemeanor cases in one year' time, depending on the seriousness of the cases.

That would require far more attorneys to handle the reduced caseload maximums.

“It would result in the dismissal of very serious cases because there wouldn’t be the capacity to handle those cases,” Strachan said.

Strachan said WASPC acknowledges people should have an adequate defense, but strictly limiting caseloads without enough attorneys in the pipeline, according to him, will make things far worse.

“This is a huge deal and people are demanding better public safety, and this rule being considered would go completely in the opposite direction,” he said.

The proposal being considered would add more support staff for public defense and would be phased in over three years.

Derek Young with the Washington State Association of Counties told justices that without a huge investment at the state level, counties can’t absorb what the proposal would cost.

"These standards will, at minimum, double or triple county costs without increased funding for these services,” he said.

According to Young, Washington’s formula for funding public defense is near the bottom in the nation when it comes to how much the state covers, versus local jurisdictions.

“We understand the need to reduce caseloads, but without significant legislative or court support, it’s not going to be possible to implement these changes,” he continued. “We are already beginning to see the nightmare scenario where suspects in violent offenses are released because timely public defense can’t be found.”

He urged the court to reject the proposal but said if the court ends up adopting the WSBA recommendations, counties will need more time to implement, beyond the three-year proposed phase-in.

The Washington State Supreme Court will hold another meeting in November.

Strachan said the court has indicated it will make a decision before the end of the year.