Idaho’s ‘unique’ judicial district

Part 2 of a series on Idaho’s changes in the public defense system

As the state of Idaho moves to a new system for public defenders, it’s creating particular challenges in the 2nd Judicial District.

The 2nd Judicial District includes Nez Perce, Latah, Idaho, Clearwater and Lewis counties. The change to the public defender system in Idaho takes the funding away from the county level and moves it to the State Public Defender Office. The office will have $49 million in funding and attorneys will be contracted through the state.

Director of Communication for the State Public Defender Patrick Orr said in an email that State Public Defender Erick Fredericksen has been practicing law in Idaho for more than 20 years, spending most of that time with the State Appellate Public Defender’s Office.

“He has deep knowledge of public defense in Idaho,” Orr said in an email.

Fredericksen has spent his time as State Public Defender since his appointment last fall meeting with attorneys, county officials, trial court administrators, judges and legislators. In those conversations he’s taken notes and then studied to use that information to create the State Public Defender’s Office, Orr said in an email.

Public defender Joanna McFarland is part of the transition team as the state moves to take over the public defender system. She was also hired July 30 as the regional public defender for the 2nd District. In the transition team each district has one representative to meet and discuss issues, and McFarland is the representative for the 2nd Judicial District. She said that each region has its own issues and they talk through those to address it statewide.

Some public defenders in the state are institutionalized, which means they are government employees. There are 14 counties that have institutionalized offices: Ada, Bannock, Blaine, Bonner, Bonneville, Canyon, Jefferson, Gooding, Kootenai, Minidoka, Cassia, Power, Oneida and Twin Falls, according to Orr.

All other 30 counties are contracted, meaning the county commissioners negotiate with attorneys and law firms for representation. The 2nd Judicial District doesn’t have an institutional office in any of the counties.

“We’re one of the only districts that is completely 100% contract,” said Roland Gammill, trial court administrator for the 2nd Judicial District.

Nez Perce County doesn’t have an institutional office because there have not been enough cases to justify the need. The county would have had to pay the salaries and benefits for employees, similar to the prosecutor’s office, according to public defenders Lawrence Moran and Rick Cuddihy.

Moran said that Nez Perce County made the decision to have a flat rate to contract with attorneys rather than establish an institutional office, which would have been paid for by the county. That system meant they knew how much it was going to cost the county every month.

For counties that have institutional offices, the transition will be smoother — they’ll go from being county employees to state employees. Contract attorneys, like in the 2nd Judicial District, will have more bumps in the road.

“That (transition for contract attorneys) has been just woefully neglected and we are now, I think, out of time to make it seamless,” Moran said.

When the state issues a mandate like changing the public defender system, it can create issues when it doesn’t fit every area of the state. In this case, some attorneys aren’t seeing how the changes fit the needs or create benefits for the 2nd Judicial District.

The current contracts and court schedule have been tailor-made to fit with the operations of the Nez Perce County Courthouse. The court schedule is created in such a way that misdemeanor and felony cases and judges’ dockets don’t overlap. With that system attorneys don’t have to be in two places at once, making cases get done in a timelier manner.

“So it’s kind of a unique system, but it’s how our system works,” Cuddihy said.

Cuddihy doesn’t know how the cases are going to be assigned through the new state office and how accommodating it will be for the way the court schedule is currently set up.

“It makes me rather anxious,” Cuddihy said.

Cuddihy said the new contracts are more “one size fits all” across the state rather than factoring in the type of case and the attorney’s level of experience, which he said is problematic.

Working through the state rather than the county also creates less flexibility. Under the old system, if there was an issue people could call and talk it out in a short period of time because they were all in the same place. Cuddihy said it was convenient and they had a good relationship with the county commissioners.

The 2nd Judicial District also has geographical issues that can create problems with scheduling cases. It’s spread out from Nez Perce, Idaho, Latah, Clearwater and Lewis counties so having multiple hearing in all cases would be difficult to travel to and cover. If attorneys in Nez Perce County get assigned cases in Lewis County, there could be scheduling conflicts between the two counties as well as working out travel to different courthouses.

Orr acknowledged in an email that each district has their own “unique legal landscape,” which is why each of Idaho’s seven judicial districts has a regional public defender. The person in that position is familiar with their districts, “including the urban and rural mix of the districts” and uses their knowledge to help the state office create a better system for public defense in the state and in their districts.

“We needed to create a client-centered agency that works statewide,” Orr said in an email. “That process never really ends, as we work to provide the best public defense for Idaho.”

Public defender Greg Rauch questions why the system was changed to have more layers and levels of management “when the system they had was doing pretty well.” Moran also agrees that the former system through the counties was working fine, including the coordination with the Nez Perce County Commissioners. McFarland is proud of the 2nd Judicial District and the attorneys who live in the area.

“They’re good attorneys who care about their clientele,” McFarland said.

Those attorneys live where they work so they are invested in the community. McFarland has seen how the district and the attorneys respond to challenges — whether its starting speciality courts for veterans, DUI, mental health and drug court, or making ways to resolve cases through Zoom during the COVID-19 pandemic. She expects this change and challenge to be no different.

“The system responds,” McFarland said. “When the need is there the system responds.”

Brewster may be contacted at kbrewster@lmtribune.com or at (208) 848-2297.