Criminal defendants often accuse their court-appointed attorneys of “working with the prosecution.”
This is, in fact, probably the most common criticism leveled at public defenders—aside from the constant scorn they endure for not promptly answering phone calls.
The “working with the prosecutor” criticism is usually prompted by the attorney’s attempt to speak objectively about the facts and the merits of a case.
If the attorney acknowledges that the prosecutor has valid arguments or that the prosecutor has offered a fair plea deal, an unreasonable defendant may view this as siding with the enemy.
For instance, I have had innumerable OUI clients who were first encountered by police after crashing their car, driving off the road, or passing out behind the wheel.
Almost invariably these clients will say to me—as though they were legal experts—“but I wasn’t driving the car.” This, they believe, makes an acquittal all but guaranteed if the case is brought to trial.
I explain to the client that this isn’t the first time an allegedly intoxicated person has been found in the driver seat of a stationary vehicle and charged with an OUI. And a jury can, based on the circumstances, conclude that the automobile was driven beforehand by the defendant.
This doesn’t mean that an acquittal is impossible. It just means that the defendant’s case is not as ironclad as he or she believes it to be.
Most clients will understand that I’m simply speaking objectively. They’ll consider what I say and proceed accordingly.
But a few will become agitated and suspicious and may even accuse me of colluding with the government.
Occasionally, some of these defendants will consult a private attorney who, eager to capitalize on the situation, assures the prospective client that there is no merit whatsoever to the state’s case.
The private lawyer may exploit the defendant by overstating the strengths of his or her case and devaluing the merits of the prosecutor’s evidence.
The defendants who hire such lawyers often get results that are equivalent to or worse than what would have been achieved by the public defender.
And, adding insult to injury, these defendants will have spent thousands of dollars in the process.