Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Defense Staffing Backlog topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Defender general outlines public‑defense staffing crisis and backlog pressures on courts
Summary
The defender general told the Judiciary Committee that Vermont’s public‑defense system is struggling with recruitment and retention, falling law‑school pipeline numbers, and a growing case backlog that fuels low‑level reoffending. He urged attention to court processes and resources rather than adding detention penalties without capacity.
The defender general briefed the Senate Judiciary Committee on Jan. 20 about mounting personnel challenges in Vermont’s public‑defense system and the operational effects of a large case backlog.
Introduced to the panel as the state’s chief public defender, the defender general described an office that combines in‑house staff and a significant roster of contract attorneys to handle conflict and overflow cases. He said the office employs roughly 100 state staff and manages about 100 outside contracts for conflict or overflow representation, and he cited a budget in the $27–28 million range.
He told senators that public‑defense hiring and retention have worsened since the pandemic: fewer law students are remaining in Vermont, many law graduates decline public defense work, and the national trend to the Uniform Bar Exam has not, in his view, increased the state’s supply of entry‑level lawyers. "We don't have a defender system of new lawyers coming from the law school," he said, adding that many candidates leave after only 12–24 months. He said the office has relied on more experienced lawyers from out of state and on expanded contracting to fill gaps.
The defender general warned that court backlogs create cascading charges and resource strain. He said the backlog of pending criminal cases is far higher than before the pandemic and that the churn of unresolved low‑level cases contributes to additional charges for people who are on conditions of release. "The bigger your backlog, the more charges build on charges, build on charges," he told the committee, arguing that prompt case disposition would relieve pressure on both the public‑defense system and corrections.
He criticized the expansion of remote court practices for arraignment and other procedural hearings, saying remote procedures have produced pro forma arraignments that reduce the quality of representation and complicate case management. "Remote court ... is not an efficient process," he said, and noted that failures in assignment and administrative handoffs have left some people in custody without counsel for extended periods.
On resources, the defender general said the office has historically balanced budgets but now faces structural pressures: recruitment is difficult, and lawyers are entering the profession with high student debt, diminishing the appeal of lower‑paying public‑service roles. He asked lawmakers to avoid adding criminal penalties or detention expansions without matching investments in court capacity and defense resources.
The office did not present specific legislative asks on Jan. 20 but said it would continue to work with the committee and other justice stakeholders to identify sustainable staffing and case‑management solutions.
