SOME OF THE PROBLEMS INHERENT IN THE ASSIGNED COUNSEL SYSTEM ARE REFLECTED IN THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THREE CATEGORIES OF ATTORNEYS LIKELY TO BE APPOINTED: 'COURTHOUSE REGULARS' (ATTORNEYS WHO RELY ON COURT ASSIGNMENTS FOR THEIR LIVELIHOOD AND WHO TEND TO NEGOTIATE GUILTY PLEAS AND TRY CASES WITHOUT INVESTIGATION, PREPARATION, OR CONCERN FOR THE NEEDS OF THEIR CLIENTS); 'UPTOWN LAWYERS' (CORPORATE, LABOR, SECURITIES, PATENT, AND GENERAL PRACTICE ATTORNEYS WITH LITTLE CRIMINAL TRIAL EXPERIENCE); AND NEOPHYTES. THE TENDENCY OF THE APPELLATE COURTS TO IGNORE THE PROBLEM OF INEFFECTIVE LEGAL REPRESENTATION FOR INDIGENT DEFENDANTS IS DISCUSSED, AND TRADITIONAL AND INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO THE PROBLEM ARE CONSIDERED. AMONG THE INNOVATIONS ARE REQUIRING CRIMINAL LAWYERS TO BE CERTIFIED, AS THE MEDICAL PROFESSION CERTIFIES SPECIALISTS; PLACING THE POWER OF APPOINTMENT, FEE DETERMINATION, AND QUALITY REVIEW WITH A PUBLIC AGENCY INDEPENDENT OF THE COURTS; AND CREATING PUBLIC DEFENDER SYSTEMS THAT PARALLEL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SYSTEMS. THE POSSIBILITY OF A MIXED PUBLIC DEFENDER/ASSIGNED COUNSEL SYSTEM FOR TEXAS IS RAISED. PROBLEMS TO BE ADDRESSED REGARDLESS OF THE TYPE OF SYSTEM CHOSEN (DETERMINING WHAT LEVEL OF POVERTY CONSTITUTES INDIGENCE, SENSITIZING DEFENSE ATTORNEYS TO THEIR IMPORTANT ROLE IN SENTENCING AND IN PRETRIAL RELEASE AND DIVERSION) ARE IDENTIFIED. AN EXPANDED, HOLISTIC ROLE FOR THE DEFENSE ATTORNEY IS ENVISIONED. REFERENCES ARE FOOTNOTED. (LKM)