Other articles by Kim Smith:

Mistrials occur for numerous reasons; who might be at fault isn't predictable Man gets 10 years in stickup, ATM theft Deal means 17 1/2 years, max, in rapeAjo man, 19, is indicted in rape, killing of girl, 7 After 20 years on death row, he's free 3 arraigned in killings of girl, 9, fatherIndictment: Slain Ajo girl was raped, stabbedTucson man who killed mom gets 25-to-life in state hospitalWoman admits to role in killing of Tucson cabbie Judge rejects effort to silence Hermitage criticism

Trades/Construction
RANCHO RESORT
MAINTANANCE POSITION Administrative & Professional
Tucson Urban League
CEO/President Administrative & Professional
Jorgensen Brooks Group
Counselor Finance and Accounting
Charles E. Gillman Company
Accounting Specialist Mechanical
Komatsu Equipment Co
Resident Field Mechanic Sales and Marketing
Everready Glass
Sales Reps

Poor people's constitutional right to a free lawyer cost Pima County taxpayers nearly $19 million last year — nearly double the cost of five years ago despite just a 26 percent increase in cases.

The lion's share of the increase went not to the pool of public attorneys created to provide indigent defense, but to a list of private law-yers hired by the county at significantly higher rates.

Payments to private attorneys jumped 81 percent in five years, while budgets for the county's own Public Defender's and Legal Defender's offices went up 30 percent each.

Over the last two years, six private attorneys took in more than $200,000 apiece representing defendants some criminal justice analysts believe should have been represented by a public or legal defender at less expense. Brick Storts, the top earner, collected more than $542,000.

Every day, the Office of Court Appointed Counsel gets a list of newly arrested people who need to be assigned lawyers because they can't afford their own, said Phil Maloney, administrative attorney for the office.

The first preference is to assign the case to a public defender or a legal defender, he said.

But a lot of the time that can't happen because of conflicts of interest involving multiple defendants in the same case or because the public attorneys are overbooked. Then the case has to go to a private attorney, selected from a rotating list of attorneys who have standing contracts, Maloney said.

Over the last dozen years, the number of cases assigned to public defenders steadily declined for a variety of reasons, such as that many of the lawyers in those offices were too inexperienced to handle serious felonies or they frequently declined to accept cases, saying they were already overburdened.

In December 1995, public attorneys handled 68 percent of all felony cases, but by January 2005, the percentage had fallen to 44 percent.

Private contract attorneys went from handling 14 percent of all felony cases in December 1995 to handling 42 percent in January 2005.

The number of defendants who hired their own lawyer fell from 18 percent to 14 percent.

Since private attorneys command much higher fees — $75 an hour for a first-degree murder case — compared with $47.58 for the highest-paid public attorney, the cost of indigent defense rose accordingly.

Some Tucson taxpayers don't like the situation.

Tucson resident Andrew Venne, for example, isn't surprised by the cost of indigent defense, given Tucson's crime rate, but thinks private attorneys and the county's defense attorneys ought to be paid the same amount.

"Private attorneys are just ambulance chasers anyway, so of course they're going to go after the big bucks," Venne said.

Chris Schrager, another Tucsonan, said the jump in indigent-defense costs is just another example of government outsourcing.

"It's meant to cut down on bloated government jobs, but they wind up spending more taxpayer money with less results," Schrager said.

When Bob Hooker took over the Pima County Public Defender's Office in January 2005, County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry gave him some "marching orders," Hooker said.

"My office has to grow and take on a larger percentage of the cases that have been going to the contract attorneys," Hooker said.

Over the last year, Hooker said, he has changed policies and implemented new programs to meet that goal.

The office no longer handles misdemeanor cases or certain probation-violation cases, giving his attorneys more time to work on felonies, meaning fewer of felony cases are going to private attorneys.

He moved his more experienced attorneys out of the appellate and juvenile divisions and put them back into the courtroom, since more experienced attorneys can handle higher caseloads.

Before Hooker's appointment, if attorneys wanted off cases because they felt overwhelmed or didn't get along with their clients, they could send their cases to contract attorneys at any time, even if they were nine months into the case.

Now, Hooker said, his office won't even accept a case unless an attorney is positive he or she has the time and inclination to do it, again resulting in fewer cases going to private attorneys.

An office reorganization, from the senior attorneys clear down to the clerical support staff, has also allowed everyone to work more efficiently, he said.

As a result, the Public Defender's Office has gone from handling 31 percent of all felony cases in January 2005 to handling 42 percent in January 2006.

Within two years, he hopes to be handling 75 to 80 percent of all first-degree-murder cases. Within five years, he hopes to be handling 75 to 80 percent of all felony cases.

Not everyone believes the Public Defender's Office should take on more murder cases.

Richard Parrish, a private attorney who made nearly $300,000 on county cases in the last two years, believes murder defendants suffer when they are represented by public defenders.

"You do not get prime quality defense lawyers who can handle serious cases when you're only paying them $60,000 to $100,000 a year," Parrish said. "The Public Defenders' Office and the Legal Defenders' Office have always been prime training ground for lawyers and, once they achieve their skills, they go into private practice and make significantly more money. There are very few people altruistic enough to stick around."

Judge Michael Cruikshank, who presides over Pima County Superior Court's criminal division, said for too many years, the Public Defender's Office suffered from training, discipline and supervision-related issues.

"He's (Hooker) got a task overcoming years of thought patterns," but has already made a lot of strides with the help of his second-in-command, Bob Hirsch, Cruik-shank said.

Hooker's goal of handling 80 percent of the county's indigent cases is "an admirable and ambitious goal" and is probably achievable, Cruikshank said.

But first, Hooker will need to find a way to pay his attorneys better so they'll stick around, and he'll need to get more out of his attorneys without overwhelming them, Cruikshank said.