skip navigation

Add your conference to our Justice Events calendar


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the NCJRS Abstracts Database. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

  NCJ Number: NCJ 241159     Find in a Library
  Title: Measuring the Effect of Defense Counsel on Homicide Case Outcomes, Executive Summary
  Document URL: PDF 
  Author(s): James M. Anderson ; Paul Heaton
  Corporate Author: RAND
United States of America
  Date Published: 12/2012
  Page Count: 6
  Annotation: This study examined the impact of randomly assigned public defenders and court-appointed private attorneys in the outcome of criminal cases in Philadelphia.
  Abstract: One in five indigent murder defendants in Philadelphia are randomly assigned representation by the Defender Association of Philadelphia while the remainder received court-appointed private attorneys. The authors exploit this random assignment to measure how defense counsel affects murder case outcomes. The primary dataset consisted of a sample of 3,412 defendants charged with murder between 1994 and 2005. Compared to appointed counsel, public defenders reduce their client's murder conviction rate by 19%, lowered the probability that their clients would receive a life sentence by 62%, and reduced overall expected time served in prison by 24%. When the authors applied methods used in past studies of public defenders that did not have the benefit of random assignment, they obtained far more modest estimated impacts, which suggests defendant sorting is an important confounder affecting past research. To explore possible explanations for this large disparity in outcomes, the authors interviewed judges, Defender Association attorneys, and attorneys who took appointments. Interviewees identified a variety of institutional factors that decreased the likelihood that appointed counsel would prepare cases as well as the Defender Association attorneys. Although the authors research is limited by the fact that it is focused on a single jurisdiction, the vast difference in outcomes for defendants assigned different counsel types raises important questions about the adequacy and fairness of the criminal justice system and additional research on the effect of counsel from other jurisdictions is required.
  Main Term(s): Defense counsel effectiveness
  Index Term(s): Defense services ; Defense counsel ; Court appointed counsel ; Defense preparation ; Public defenders ; Attorneys ; Case processing ; NIJ final report
  Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
US Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
United States of America
  Grant Number: 2009-IJ-CX-0013
  Sale Source: NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
  Type: Report (Study/Research)
  Country: United States of America
  Language: English
  To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.