Sitting behind him is attorney Brad Baldwin, who is being paid to look out for the boy’s best interests.
Baldwin knows the kid, his family and their problems because over the years the court has appointed Baldwin to represent the family members in their encounters with the juvenile justice system.
This is how Baldwin makes a living.
“It can be tough, but I also think it’s an area of the law where you can make a difference,” Baldwin said.
Baldwin is among five lawyers who were appointed more than 500 times by Montgomery County Juvenile Court between 2007 and February 2010, and he ranks fifth among Miami Valley attorneys for total appointed counsel fees in a 12-month period, according to state and county records.
There are 170 attorneys on the appointed counsel list maintained by Montgomery County Juvenile Court. Court staff is supposed to call the next attorney on the list when a case comes up. But the distribution of the cases show that the rotary system is not being strictly followed, and some attorneys wonder whether favoritism plays a role in who gets the work.
Kettering attorney William Daley calls it an old boys system, a clique.
“It’s pure, unadulterated corruption,” said Daley, who does not take appointed work in juvenile court.
Some attorneys on the list were reluctant to speak out, fearing they’d lose appointment work, but privately they said they suspect favoritism plays a role in the assignments.
Montgomery County Juvenile Court Judge Nick Kuntz, a judge since 1994, admits that a handful of lawyers end up with more appointed work in juvenile court but says the reason isn’t favoritism.
“The reality of it is they’re the ones who, you know, they will take any case and find a way to meet the needs of the court and the docket time. So, you know, there are a number of them continue to get a number of the cases,” Kuntz said. “You pop up on the computer and you make four or five phone calls and you don’t get anybody to take the case, and you know one of those guys will pop up and they take any case.”
Attorney Stephanie Allen, who handled 111 appointed cases in juvenile court in recent years, said she’d like to see the rotary system followed more closely to give more attorneys a chance at learning this juvenile court work.
“We would be training more new attorneys in what is a valuable service to the community,” Allen said. “It’s not fair that some attorneys get six or seven times more work than others.”
Appointed counsel is paid between $40 and $60 an hour, depending on the county and the case, and they handle cases that the local public defender’s office cannot. Judges make appointments, but state and county governments pay the bills.
Last year, Ohio Public Defender Tim Young started digging into a database of billings from appointed counsel across the state and found 16 attorneys statewide who were paid more than $100,000 for appointed work over 12 months. Several of them received an inordinate share of the work from one court, he said.
Young is questioning how these attorneys could handle so many cases and still do a good job and whether their allegiances are to their clients or to the court that is assigning them the work and providing a steady income.
Kuntz, Baldwin and attorney Ben Swift and others deny any insinuation that the attorneys getting a disproportionate number of cases are somehow doing a poor job for clients.
“I can tell you this: they are not lay-down lawyers,” Kuntz said of the top five.
Two of the five — Swift and Jeffrey Livingston — each made $350 campaign contributions to Judge Tony Capizzi in 2004. Campaign finance records for the last time Kuntz raised money to beat an opponent are no longer available, according to the Montgomery County Board of Elections.
Of all the courts in Montgomery County, only juvenile court is showing a spike in case assignments to a handful of lawyers, Young said.
According to Young’s data, five attorneys were paid $483,142 for 11,231 hours in appointed work between March 2008 and February 2009. Fifty-six percent of the work came from Montgomery County Juvenile Court.
Montgomery County Juvenile Court Legal Director Greg Scott said some attorneys get more work because the court tends to assign the same lawyer once he or she has worked with a family. For example, the lawyer might first act as a guardian ad litem in a custody dispute when the child is a toddler and be re-assigned if the custody dispute drags on and again if the child faces delinquency charges as a teenager. Under those situations, the system favors longevity on the list.
Despite what some may see as undesirable assignments, appointed counsel work is sought out by many attorneys, particularly younger attorneys trying to build their practices.
Attorney Mary Beth Caudill said over the 26 years that she’s been on the juvenile appointment list, she has seen the numbers of attorneys seeking the work swell.
“Money is tighter now and there are more people on the appointment list than way back when,” she said.
Young notes that he cannot tell judges what lawyers to appoint, but the Ohio Public Defender Commission recently revised its rules addressing attorney qualifications and training. The state public defender’s office will begin auditing the appointed counsel system at the county level, he said.
Young is preparing a letter for judges and county commissioners that puts them on notice: If courts appoint lawyers who don’t meet the minimum standards, the state public defender’s office won’t pay the bill.
Between March 2008 and February 2009 — the latest data available — the state and counties paid out $1.8 million to appointed counsel across Ohio for 43,495 hours of time.
Ohioans should care about this because they are footing the bills and may one day need a court-appointed attorney, Young said.
“Someday it may be their son, their daughter, their brother or their uncle who may be represented by one of these people.”
About the Author
