THE ON-SITE EVALUATION OF DEFENSE SERVICES IN KLEBERG, DUVAL, JIM WELLS, BROOKS, AND KENEDY COUNTIES IN MARCH OF 1979 INVOLVED INTERVIEWS WITH NUMEROUS MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY (LARGELY SPANISH-SPEAKING), A COMMUNITY MEETING, AND INTERVIEWS WITH THE COUNTY JUDGES, DISTRICT ATTORNEYS, AND DISTRICT JUDGES IN EACH OF THE COUNTIES. FINDINGS INDICATE A GENERALLY LOW LEVEL OF COMMITMENT TO THE ADVERSARY SYSTEM AND TO ZEALOUS CRIMINAL REPRESENTATION FOR ALL DEFENDANTS. THE COURTS APPEAR TO FUNCTION IN A PATERNALISTIC MANNER, WITH FEW ADVERSARIAL TRIALS DUE TO THE HIGH PERCENTAGE OF GUILTY PLEAS. DEFENSE ATTORNEYS FOR INDIGENTS ARE SELECTED BY THE JUDGE ON AN AD HOC BASIS FROM ATTORNEYS IN THE COMMUNITY. PAY IS BASED UPON COURT APPEARANCE, WITHOUT REFERENCE TO THE AMOUNT OF TIME SPENT IN COURT OR OUTSIDE OF THE COURT IN CASE PREPARATION, THUS PRODUCING A COST-INEFFICIENT INCENTIVE FOR ASSIGNED COUNSEL. FREQUENTLY, THE ATTORNEYS ASSIGNED TO SPANISH-SPEAKING DEFENDANTS CANNOT SPEAK SPANISH. A CENTRAL PROBLEM HAMPERING THE DEVELOPMENT OF MORE VIGOROUS DEFENSE REPRESENTATION IS THE SMALL BUDGET GENERATED BY THE LOW INCOMES OF THE COUNTY RESIDENTS. THE PROPOSED PUBLIC DEFENDER SYSTEM WOULD BE MORE COST EFFICIENT THAN THE CURRENT ASSIGNED COUNSEL SYSTEM, ASSUMING THAT BOTH THE PUBLIC DEFENDER AND ASSIGNED COUNSEL RECEIVE AN ADEQUATE RATE OF COMPENSATION. A PUBLIC DEFENDER IS MORE LIKELY TO PROVIDE ZEALOUS REPRESENTATION, FEWER GUILTY PLEAS, MORE JURY TRIALS, MORE PRETRIAL DISCOVERY, AN ADEQUATE INCREASED MOTION PRACTICE. THE STAFFING, LOGISTICS, AND BUDGET FOR THE PROPOSED PUBLIC DEFENDER SYSTEM ARE PRESENTED. (RCB)