The indigent accused’s right to counsel in criminal prosecutions has long been an important part of the American legal tradition. Public defenders routinely confront legal, professional, and moral dilemmas and regularly represent guilty defendants, many who are accused of serious and violent crimes. In addition, many public defenders are denounced and seen as incompetent. Taking all this into account, observers have wondered why public defenders choose their calling. There has yet to be a systematic examination of public defender motivation. This research is an attempt to systematically address the motivations of criminal court practitioners and begins by concentrating on the public defender. Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 48 defenders in 3 locations. The participants described a varied assortment of motivations, which were categorized for this research as either pragmatic or political. Pragmatic motivation is presented as "inward looking" it involves the occupational advantages indigent defense work provides for defenders themselves. Political motivations express a distinctively ideological worldview and encompass cynical perspectives about the social structure in general and the criminal justice system in particular. Pragmatic, constitutional, altruistic and critical motivations were expressed with assurance and zeal by the defenders interviewed. The pragmatic and political motivations that drive public defenders seem to collectively constitute a broad mindset unique to the profession. And, while individual defenders may possess such motivations in varying proportions, their commitment to their work is clear. References and appendix