Right to Counsel
Subject : Criminal Law - Constitutional Rights
PORTLAND, Ore. — A federal appeals court on Friday upheld a ruling that Oregon defendants must be released from jail after seven days if they don't have a defense attorney.
In its decision, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals called Oregon's public defense system a "Sixth Amendment nightmare," OPB reported, referring to the part of the U.S. Constitution that guarantees people accused of crimes the right to a lawyer. The opinion said Oregon is responsible for upholding legal protections for criminal defendants.
Oregon has struggled for years to address its public defender crisis. As of Friday, more than 3,200 defendants did not have a public defender, a dashboard from the Oregon Judicial Department showed. Of those, about 146 people were in custody, but fewer people were expected to be impacted by Friday's ruling, according to OPB.
An Office of Public Defense Services draft report from March found that Oregon needs 500 additional attorneys to meet its obligations, OPB reported. State officials have sought to address the issue, including by taking such steps as providing additional funding, but structural issues remain.
Next year, the Oregon Public Defense Commission will move from the judiciary to the executive branch under the governor. State lawmakers hope the move will provide more support to the agency.
The 9th Circuit's decision upheld a preliminary injunction issued by U.S. District Court Judge Michael McShane last year. The case came from
Oregon's federal public defender, Fidel Cassino-DuCloux, said Friday's decision "breathes life into the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, which have been an empty promise for too many presumptively innocent Oregonians charged with crimes."
"We hope that the state authorities heed the
When asked by OPB whether the state would appeal, a spokesperson for the Oregon Department of Justice said they're reviewing the decision.
public defender crisis - Sixth Amendment right to counsel - criminal defendants - habeas corpus petition - judicial oversight - executive branch support - structural issues - legal protections - presumptively innocent
#OregonPublicDefense #SixthAmendment #CriminalJusticeReform
Vague 'Bad Work' Can't Presume Penetrative Sexual Assault Under POCSO Section 4 Without Evidence: Patna High Court
28 Apr 2026
Limiting Crop Damage Compensation to Specific Wild Animals Excluding Birds Violates Article 14: Bombay HC
28 Apr 2026
Appeal Limitation in 1991 Police Rules Yields to Uttarakhand Police Act 2007 on Inconsistency: Uttarakhand HC
28 Apr 2026
Nashik Court Reserves Verdict on Khan's TCS Bail Plea
29 Apr 2026
Delhi Court Grants Bail to I-PAC Director in PMLA Case
30 Apr 2026
No Historic Record of Saraswati Temple Demolition, Muslim Body Tells MP High Court in Bhojshala Dispute
30 Apr 2026
No Absolute Bar on Simultaneous Parole/Furlough for Co-Accused Under Delhi Prisons Rules: Delhi High Court
30 Apr 2026
Rejection of Jurisdiction Plea under Section 16 Arbitration Act Not Challengeable under Section 34 Till Final Award: Supreme Court
30 Apr 2026
'Living Separately' Under Section 13B HMA Means Cessation Of Marital Obligations, Regardless Of Residence: Patna High Court
30 Apr 2026
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.