State Of Louisiana v. Kiffany Spears

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 2019 KW 1494

VERSUS
MAR 13 2029
RODERICK L. COVINGTON, Page 1 of 2
SAMANTHA KELLY, AND KIFFANY
SPEARS

In Re: Michael Mitchell, in his capacity as District Defender
of the Office of Public Defender for the Parish of

East Baton Rouge, applying for supervisory writs, 19th
Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge,
Nos. 08- 18- 0486, 10- 18- 0529, 07- 18- 0409, 07- 18- 0422, &
07- 18- 0233.

BEFORE: MCDONALD, THERIOT, AND CHUTZ, JJ.

WRIT GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Relator presented
sufficient evidence to the district court that shows the
appointed public defenders cannot
effectively represent their
indigent clients in a manner consistent with their
constitutional and ethical obligations due to excessive
caseloads. There is a conflict of interest when a public

defender is compelled by his or her excessive caseload to choose
between the rights of the various indigent defendants he or she
is representing. See Louisiana Rules Professional
of Conduct,
Rule 1. 7. It is well- settled that the Sixth Amendment right to
counsel is the right to effective assistance of counsel. That a
person who happens to be a lawyer is present at trial alongside
the accused, however, is not enough to the
satisfy
constitutional command. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U. S.
668, 685- 86, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2063, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674 ( 1984).
Moreover, trial courts have both the the
authority and

responsibility to manage their dockets in a way that both moves
their cases and respects the constitutional and statutory rights
of the defendant, the prosecutor, and the public defender. See
La. Code Crim. P. art. 17. A trial court can use its inherent

authority over its docket to triage cases so that those alleging
the most serious offenses, those in which defendants are unable
to seek or obtain bail, and those that for other reasons need to
be given priority in their resolution, are given
priority in
appointing the public defender and scheduling trials, even if it
means that other categories of cases are continued or delayed,
either
formally or effectively, as a result of the failure to
appoint counsel for those unable to afford private counsel. See
e. g., State ex rel. Missouri Pub. Def. Comm' n Waters,
v. 370
S. W. 3d 592, 605 ( Mo. 2012) ( en banc).

Accordingly, the district court' s
ruling denying the
motions to withdraw as counsel is reversed, in part, and the
order appointing the public defender in docket number 10- 18- 0529
is rescinded because a plea was entered in this case. The order
appointing the public defender in docket numbers 07- 18- 0409 and
07- 18- 0233 is vacated, and the request to allow the named public
defenders to withdraw from future representation of certain
indigent defendants in Section VI until the caseloads are no
greater than 100%
of his or her annual capacity is granted. The

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

No. 2019 KW 1494
Page 2 of 2

district court is instructed to meet with the Chief District
Defender and the prosecutors to determine categories of cases in
which representation by public defenders in Section VI may be
triaged so that each said public defender is able to provide

reasonably effective and competent assistance of counsel under
the Louisiana Rules of Professional Conduct the
and United
States and Louisiana Constitutions.

im
WRC

Theriot, J., dissents in part and would deny the writ

application. While I agree with the order to rescind the
appointment of the public defender in docket number 10- 18- 0529
because a plea was entered in that case, I do find
not that
handling withdrawals on a case- by- case basis is an abuse of the
trial court' s discretion. See State v. Leger, 2005- 0011 ( La.
7/ 10/ 06), 936 So. 2d 108, 142, cert. denied, 549 U. S. 1221, 127
S. Ct. 1279, 167 L. Ed. 2d 100 ( 2007).

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

D UIC
DUTY
FOR
ER

THE
OF
COURT
COURT