# Do you actually have the right to an attorney in the USA? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 2, 2015, 8:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-actually-have-the-right-to-an-attorney-in-the-usa/711586 "2015-02-02T08:59:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![bob\_2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bob_2/32/3341_2.png) [@bob\_2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bob_2)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2015, 12:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-actually-have-the-right-to-an-attorney-in-the-usa/711586/21 "2015-02-04T12:36:45Z")
A side question: Is it normal for US citizens to carry legal insurance to pay for representation in the event that they get into trouble? My home insurance has this tacked on as additional cover. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2015, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-actually-have-the-right-to-an-attorney-in-the-usa/711586/22 "2015-02-04T13:11:36Z")
> [@bob\_2](#): > > A side question: Is it normal for US citizens to carry legal insurance to pay for representation in the event that they get into trouble? My home insurance has this tacked on as additional cover. I didn’t even know about that until I met my girlfriend and found out her divorce cost her about $250. Yes I was jealous. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2015, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-actually-have-the-right-to-an-attorney-in-the-usa/711586/23 "2015-02-04T13:29:10Z")
No, for some reason that type of insurance has not made broad inroads on this side of the pond. I understand it’s fairly common in the UK and Europe. I don’t understand why it’s not been adopted broadly here in North America. It seems eminently practical and a good step to help ensure access to justice. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2015, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-actually-have-the-right-to-an-attorney-in-the-usa/711586/24 "2015-02-04T13:55:39Z")
In the US they do sell dedicated legal insurance. It’s often offered by larger employers as an additional benefit option, but solely at the employee’s expense. Most of these programs are ill-disguised ripoffs. What you get for your payment is the right to call a telephone call center and speak to a “paralegal”. And they can arrange for you to hire an attorney from their list at a much-reduced price. \*If \*they have somebody local to you, which is not guaranteed, especially if you’re not in a big city. My wife’s a lawyer and once looked into affiliating with a few of these systems as a provider. She was expecting something akin to how an MD agrees to take XYZ Health System’s insurance plan. Nope. They would send her clients which she was obligated to accept and then pay her a pittance for the work. On a fixed fee schedule which put 100% of the risk of being assigned a complex case on her, rather than on them. The bottom line being that the attorneys who do sign up to be providers under this system are unlikely to be top performers; rather it’s the lawyers who’d otherwise starve if they had to depend on their own skill & reputation to survive. Her research was 15+ years ago now, so it may be obsolete. But every year I see solicitations for very similar legal insurance plans in my employee benefit enrollment package. What changes from year to year is which insurer my employer is shilling for. Since the model hasn’t changed from the consumer POV, I conclude it probably hasn’t changed (much) from the provider POV either. ---
**Author:** ![grude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47774/32.png) [@grude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/grude)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2015, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-actually-have-the-right-to-an-attorney-in-the-usa/711586/25 "2015-02-05T02:37:56Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The recommended text given prior to custodial interrogations per the Miranda decision says, “…and if you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you.” Other court decisions have shaped the contours of this right, but I quote these lines to emphasize that you don’t, and have never had, an unfettered right to free legal representation. > > The seminal case on point is _Gideon v. Wainwright_, a 1963 Supreme Court holding. Clarence Gideon was charged with burglary in Florida. At trial, he said he couldn’t afford an attorney, but the judge refused to appoint one for him, inasmuch as Florida law only required state-paid counsel for poor defendants charged with capital (i.e., death-penalty) crimes. He tried to defend himself, but was convicted, and appealed based on his lack of a lawyer. The Supreme Court took up his case (after reading his hand-written request for certorari!) and decided that because a lawyer is a such a critical asset in criminal defense, a poor person is denied due process if he is forced to defend himself because he cannot afford to pay an attorney. > > Since then, progeny of the _Gideon_ decision have extended rights to earlier phases of the criminal process, such as arraignment, and to subsequent aspects such as appeals. > > None of them have removed the rationale that this right exists when the accused is too impoverished to pay for his own lawyer. Thank you! I have a habit of making poorly worded questions, I know I have a problem and am trying to word better. But yes I was wondering just how far states can go in putting obstacles to public defenders. This outdated article I found said that Texas is one of the few states where judges directly decide which public defender is assigned to which defendant: [http://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/Texas-needs-public-defenders-1621574.php](http://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/Texas-needs-public-defenders-1621574.php) > [@](#): > > Texas has improved its indigent defense system since 2001. The Fair Defense Act provided state funding to subsidize a service that previously had been funded only by counties. The Task Force on Indigent Defense was created to administer these funds, provide oversight, and set policies to improve the system. The FDA set standards for the prompt appointment of counsel, and requires judges to have a “fair, neutral and non-discriminatory” method of appointing counsel to reduce the perception of cronyism by judges mainly appointing lawyers who contributed to their election campaigns. > > Since the adoption of the FDA, indigent counsel appointments in Texas have increased by 45 percent, from 324,412 in 2002 to 470,625 in 2009. This may have helped reduce jail costs as more defendants are released on bond or under pre-trial supervision. There are also now 16 public defender offices serving 91 counties regionally or in specific counties. Harris County, the most populous county in the nation without a public defender office, is set to start a public defender office later this year. These offices hire their own lawyers and provide support services, just like district attorney offices do. If run well, public defenders can be cost-effective while providing quality representation. Texas public defender offices specializing in serving mentally ill defendants have reduced guilty dispositions, increased the number of defendants receiving probation, and assisted in getting for defendants services that reduce recidivism. > > Progress has been made, but we still face significant challenges in Texas. Counties still carry most of the cost of supporting defendants’ constitutional rights to counsel. The state pays about $30 million for indigent defense services through court fees, not tax dollars. While this is better than nothing, it covers a small portion of the nearly $200 million spent on indigent defense in Texas. As counties suffer revenue shortages, this is one area that many counties will be tempted to cut. > > Because public defender offices have proven to be cost-effective and more accountable to taxpayers, we should expand their use and get the state to financially support these offices to relieve the counties of increasing funding pressures. Texas should also experiment with removing judges from directly selecting and supervising indigent defense lawyers. Judges don’t pick the prosecutor for a trial; nor should they choose the defense lawyer. I guess an add on question which I should have included in my OP was at what point would the SC step in and tell a state you’re impeding access to public defenders for the indigent. And as a another poster asked what happens if someone looks on paper like they could afford counsel, but in reality cannot? Or just refuses to hire counsel, do they just sit in jail until they hire one? ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2015, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-actually-have-the-right-to-an-attorney-in-the-usa/711586/26 "2015-02-05T03:16:08Z")
> [@grude](#): > > I guess an add on question which I should have included in my OP was at what point would the SC step in and tell a state you’re impeding access to public defenders for the indigent. The Supreme Court doesn’t just step in; somebody has to appeal a case or sue the government, arguing that their right to counsel as established by existing precedent is not being met. > [@](#): > > And as a another poster asked what happens if someone looks on paper like they could afford counsel, but in reality cannot? Or just refuses to hire counsel, do they just sit in jail until they hire one? Everybody has the right to defend themselves at a criminal trial if they want to. (The judge will try very hard to convince you otherwise, though.) If you don’t hire counsel _and_ refuse to offer your own defense, the state can appoint counsel for you and send you a bill. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-actually-have-the-right-to-an-attorney-in-the-usa/711586.md?page=1)