Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
1668673
label
1974/09/03 S3703 District of Columbia Criminal Justice Code Amendment
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1668673
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
1974/09/03 S3703 District of Columbia Criminal Justice Code Amendment
citationUrl
collections
White House Records Office: Legislation Case Files
Legislation Case Files
subjects
Washington (D.C.)
Judicial matters
Legislation
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1668673
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1974-09-30
month
9
year
1974
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1974-08-01
month
8
year
1974
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
3cf86af4081cfb9d
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 6, folder "9/3/74 S3703 District of Columbia
Criminal Justice Code Amendment" of the White House Records Office: Legislation Case
Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Exact duplicates within this folder were not digitized.
APPROVED
Digitized from the White House Records Office Legisation Case Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
SEP 3- 3'
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
AUG 2 3 1974
Posted
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
9/3
Subject: Enrolled Bill S. 3703 - District of Columbia
Criminal Justice Code amendment
ardmies
Sponsor - Sen. Eagleton (D) Missouri
q/k
Last Day for Action
Purpose
To provide for representation of indigent defendants in
criminal cases in the District of Columbia.
Agency Recommendations
Office of Management and Budget
Approval
District of Columbia Government
Approval
Department of Justice
Approval
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts
No objection
Discussion
The enrolled bill would amend the D.C. Criminal Code to provide
for development and operation by the Joint Committee on Judicial
Administration of a plan for furnishing representation for indi-
gent defendants in D.C. courts. The bill would cover a defend-
ant financially unable to obtain adequate legal representation
who is charged with an offense for which the Constitution or
D.C. law would require representation, who is under arrest when
representation is required, who is charged with parole or pro-
bation violation, who is subject to proceedings relating to
hospitalization of mentally ill, and who is a juvenile delinquent.
BERALD FORD LIBRARY
2
S. 3703 would further provide for provision of limited ancillary
services such as investigative or expert services necessary to
an adequate defense.
The enrolled bill would authorize appropriation of such sums
as may be necessary during fiscal years 1975 and 1976. Further,
the bill would provide for retroactivity to July 1, 1974.
In its report on S. 3703, the House Committee on the District
of Columbia stated that in previous years defense for the in-
digent was provided under the Criminal Justice Act. However,
the Court Reform and Criminal Procedure Act of 1970 transferred
local criminal jurisdiction from Federal to D.C. courts and
that:
"With the full implementation of the District of
Columbia Court Reform and Criminal Procedure Act,
the Administrative Office of the United States
Courts, the United States Judicial Conference, and
the Chief Justice of the United States have taken
the position that the Superior Court of the District
of Columbia and the District of Columbia Court of
Appeals are not the rightful beneficiaries of the
Criminal Justice Act
"In March of this year funds were exhausted from
which counsel for indigent defendants could be
paid.
"
Since the Constitution requires legal representation in certain
cases, the Committee stated:
"If counsel is not available, the court will ultimately
have to discontinue the conduct of criminal and juvenile
delinquent proceedings."
The Committee describes this legislation as obviating either
confinement without trial or release pending trial.
The D.C. Government had requested legislation overhauling the
entire indigent defendant representation system. The Committee
agreed to S. 3703 "as a temporary measure to provide legislative
authorization for the pending appropriation item in the D.C.
budget providing funds urgently required to continue the counsel
program.
3
The D.C. Government estimates the cost of the program at about
$2.3 million in fiscal year 1975. Such amount is included in
the House passed D.C. appropriation bill.
nufred H Rommel
Assistant Director for
Legislative Reference
Enclosures
BUTRICE OF COLUMBIA
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
WALTER E. WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20004
Mayor-Commissioner
August 21, 1974
Mr. Wilfred H. Rommel
Assistant Director for
Legislative Reference
Office of Management and Budget
Washington, D.C. 20503
Dear Mr. Rommel:
This is in reference to a facsimile of an enrolled
enactment of Congress entitled:
S. 3703 - To authorize in the District of
Columbia a plan providing for the repre-
sentation of defendants who are financially
unable to obtain an adequate defense in
criminal cases in the courts of the Dis-
trict of Columbia, and for other purposes.
The enrolled bill, which may be cited as the "District
of Columbia Criminal Justice Act", amends Title 11 of
the District of Columbia Code by adding thereto a chap-
ter 26 authorizing the Joint Committee on Judicial
Administration to place in operation, within ninety
days after the date of enactment of the bill, a plan
to provide for the appointment of attorneys to furnish
representation before the Superior Court of the Dis-
trict of Columbia and the District of Columbia Court
of Appeals for persons who are financially unable to
retain counsel in specified criminal cases and pro-
ceedings involving in general the potential loss of
one's liberty. The plan would include counsel and
investigative, expert, and other services, and would
include also the use of private attorneys, attorneys
furnished by the existing Public Defender Service, and
attorneys and students participating in clinical pro-
grams. The plan to be established pursuant to the
authority of the enrolled bill would replace applicable
provisions of the Criminal Justice Act of 1964 and in-
terim appropriation measures under which private at-
torneys representing indigents before the local courts
of the District of Columbia were compensated through
June 30, 1974.
Under the new section 11-2602 of the D.C. Code, as
added by S. 3703, the selection of attorneys to fur-
nish representation would be made from panels of
attorneys designated or approved by the local courts.
The new section 11-2604 would provide compensation
to attorneys appointed under the plan at a rate fixed
by the Joint Committee on Judicial Administration.
The hourly rate of compensation and the maximum
amount of compensation to be paid an appointed at-
torney would be established at a rate and in amounts
not in excess of those set forth in section 3006A(d)
of title 18, United States Code (Criminal Justice
Act) for corresponding kinds of cases or proceedings.
The new section 11-2607 would authorize the Joint
Committee on Judicial Administration to annually
prepare and submit to the Commissioner, in accor-
dance with existing procedures, an estimate of the
amount needed to compensate private attorneys for
furnishing representation in matters to which they
are appointed. The new section 11-2608 authorizes
out of moneys credited to the District of Columbia
appropriations to administer the Act for fiscal years
1975 and 1976. It is estimated that approval of
S. 3703 will result in a cost to the District of ap-
proximately $2.3 million in fiscal year 1975.
Section 3 of the enrolled bill makes inapplicable to
the Superior Court of the District of Columbia and
the District of Columbia Court of Appeals the provi-
sions of the Criminal Justice Act of 1964 which after
the date of enactment will apply only to representa-
tion of defendants before the Federal courts of the
District. Section 4 provides an effective date for
the bill upon the date of enactment, but authorizes
compensation for persons appointed to represent in-
digents on or after July 1, 1974 but prior to the
commencing date of the plan in accordance with its
provisions.
- 2 -
On April 23, 1974 the District Government submitted
to the Congress a proposed "District of Columbia
Defender Services Act", which was introduced in the
House of Representatives as H.R. 14374. While H.R.
14374 and S. 3703 are similar in objective-to insure
that defendants and respondents who are financially
unable to obtain an adequate defense in criminal
cases and proceedings before the courts of the Dis-
trict of Columbia are provided representation-they
differ materially in the method of providing such
representation. H.R. 14374 would, inter alia, have
established a District of Columbia Defender Service
to combine in a single agency, acting under an in-
dependent Board of Trustees, the existing private
attorney and Public Defender Service programs;
authorized representation of indigent defendants
before the Federal courts of the District of Co-
lumbia on a reimbursable basis; and unified the
functions of planning, selection of attorney panels,
preparation of budgets, payment of compensation to
private attorneys, and administration in an inde-
pendent agency of the District Government.
Although we believe that H.R. 14374 would have
offered the most beneficial and effective means
of providing adequate legal representation for
persons financially unable to retain counsel, we
note that the new section 11-2609 of the D.C. Code
will make inapplicable to chapter 26 the provisions
of section 602 (a) (4) of the District of Columbia
Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization
Act which prohibit the Council of the District of
Columbia from enacting any act or resolution re-
lating to the organization or jurisdiction of the
District of Columbia courts. Accordingly, after
January 2, 1975, the Council of the District of
Columbia will be able to inquire anew into the
entire matter of representation of indigent de-
fendants by private attorneys and public defen-
ders and make such determinations as it deems
appropriate.
The District Government recommends the approval of
S. 3703.
Sincerely yours,
WALTER E. WASHINGTON
Mayor-Commissioner
- 3 -
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20530
AUG 22 1974
Honorable Roy L. Ash
Director, Office of Management and
Budget
Washington, D. C. 20503
Dear Mr. Ash:
In compliance with your request, I have examined a
facsimile of the enrolled bill (S. 3703), "District of
Columbia Criminal Justice Act."
The bill would authorize the courts of the District
of Columbia to establish a plan for the reimbursement of
counsel for indigent defendants. At the present time the
Criminal Justice Act (18 U.S.C. $3006A) authorizes the
Judicial Council of the District of Columbia and the
District of Columbia Court of Appeals to jointly approve
such a plan for the District. S. 3703 would make the
Criminal Justice Act inapplicable to the Superior Court
of the District of Columbia and the District of Columbia
Court of Appeals. Instead those jurisdictions would come
within the purview of a plan to be promulgated for the
District of Columbia courts by the Joint Committee on
Judicial Administration. The parameters of the plan, out-
lined in S. 3703, are similar to those found in the
Criminal Justice Act. Thus except for transferring the
authority for a plan for the D. C. courts from the
Judicial Council and Court of Appeals to the Joint Com-
mittee, S. 3703 does not differ materially from the
Criminal Justice Act.
In the past this Department has supported the utili-
zation of public funds for the provision of legal services
to indigent defendants. Accordingly, the Department of
Justice recommends Executive approval of this bill.
Sincerely,
Wincest Rakestraw
W. Vincent Rakestraw
Assistant Attorney General
Office of Legislative Affairs
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES COURTS
SUPREME COURT BUILDING
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20544
ROWLAND F. KIRKS
DIRECTOR
August 23, 1974
WILLIAM E. FOLEY
DEPUTY DIRECTOR
Mr. W. H. Rommel
Assistant Director for
Legislative Reference
Office of Management and Budget
Washington, D. C.
Dear Mr. Rommel:
This will acknowledge receipt of your memorandum
transmitting for our views and recommendations enrolled
bill S. 3703, "To authorize in the District of Columbia
a plan providing for the representation of defendants
who are financially unable to obtain an adequate defense
in criminal cases in the courts of the District of
Columbia, and for other purposes."
S. 3703 emanates from a proposal made to the
Congress by the Judicial Conference of the United States.
The bill as enacted differs, however, in one important
and unfortunate aspect from the recommendation of the
Judicial Conference. In amending the Criminal Justice
Act of 1964 (18 U.S.C. 3006(A)) in subsection 11-2609 the
Congress prevents the federal courts in the District of
Columbia of availing themselves of the provisions of
subsection (h) of section 1 of the Criminal Justice Act
and thus precludes the establishment for the exclusive use
of the federal courts of either a federal public defender
agency or a community defender agency. Both the Judicial
Conference and this office have expressed opposition to this
restriction but inasmuch as the basic legislation achieves
a purpose much desired by the Judicial Conference, no objection
to Executive approval will be interposed.
Sincerely,
William (in Deputy Director E. Foley Lay
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
ENROLLED BILL
SUBJECT: Enrolled Bill S. 3703 - District of
Columbia Criminal Justice Code amendment
Name
Approval
Date
James Cavanaugh
Yes
Andre Buckles
Yes
Phil Buchen
Yes
Bill Timmons
Yes
Geoff Shepard
Yes
Ken Cole
C
Comments:
.5 THE WHITE HOUSE
ACTION MEMORANDUM
WASHINGTON
LOG NO.: 533
Date: August 26, 1974
Time:
9:30 a. m.
FOR ACTION: James Cavanaugh
cc (for information): Warren K. Hendriks
Andre Buckles
Jerry Jones
VPM1 Buchen
Bill Timmons
Geoff Shepard
FROM THE STAFF SECRETARY
DUE: Date: Tuesday, August 27, 1974
Time:
2:00 P. m.
SUBJECT:
Enrolled Bill S. 3703 - District of Columbia Criminal
Justice Code amendment
ACTION REQUESTED:
For Necessary Action
XX For Your Recommendations
Prepare Agenda and Brief
Draft Reply
For Your Comments
Draft Remarks
REMARKS:
Please return to Kathy Tindle - - West Wing
GERALD LISUREY r 3
PLEASE ATTACH THIS COPY TO MATERIAL SUBMITTED.
If you have any questions or if you anticipate a
delay in submitting the required material, please
K. R. COLE, JR.
telephone the Staff Secretary immediately.
For the President
8-23-74 Nudrido
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
AUG 2 3 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
Subject: Enrolled Bill S. 3703 - District of Columbia
Criminal Justice Code amendment
Sponsor - Sen. Eagleton (D) Missouri
Last Day for Action
Purpose
To provide for representation of indigent defendants in
criminal cases in the District of Columbia.
Agency Recommendations
Office of Management and Budget
Approval
District of Columbia Government
Approval
Department of Justice
Approval
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts
No objection
Discussion
The enrolled bill would amend the D.C. Criminal Code to provide
for development and operation by the Joint Committee on Judicial
Administration of a plan for furnishing representation for indi-
gent defendants in D.C. courts. The bill would cover a defend-
ant financially unable to obtain adequate legal representation
who is charged with an offense for which the Constitution or
D.C. law would require representation, who is under arrest when
representation is required, who is charged with parole or pro-
bation violation, who is subject to proceedings relating to
hospitalization of mentally ill, and who is a juvenile delinquent.
FORO & LIBRARY 078870
2
S. 3703 would further provide for provision of limited ancillary
services such as investigative or expert services necessary to
an adequate defense.
The enrolled bill would authorize appropriation of such sums
as may be necessary during fiscal years 1975 and 1976. Further,
the bill would provide for retroactivity to July 1, 1974.
In its report on S. 3703, the House Committee on the District
of Columbia stated that in previous years defense for the in-
digent was provided under the Criminal Justice Act. However,
the Court Reform and Criminal Procedure Act of 1970 transferred
local criminal jurisdiction from Federal to D.C. courts and
that:
"With the full implementation of the District of
Columbia Court Reform and Criminal Procedure Act,
the Administrative Office of the United States
Courts, the United States Judicial Conference, and
the Chief Justice of the United States have taken
the position that the Superior Court of the District
of Columbia and the District of Columbia Court of
Appeals are not the rightful beneficiaries of the
Criminal Justice Act
"In March of this year funds were exhausted from
which counsel for indigent defendants could be
paid.'
Since the Constitution requires legal representation in certain
cases, the Committee stated:
"If counsel is not available, the court will ultimately
have to discontinue the conduct of criminal and juvenile
delinquent proceedings."
The Committee describes this legislation as obviating either
confinement without trial or release pending trial.
The D.C. Government had requested legislation overhauling the
entire indigent defendant representation system. The Committee
agreed to S. 3703 "as a temporary measure to provide legislative
authorization for the pending appropriation item in the D.C.
budget providing funds urgently required to continue the counsel
program.
"
3
The D.C. Government estimates the cost of the program at about
$2.3 million in fiscal year 1975. Such amount is included in
the House passed D.C. appropriation bill.
neefred H Rommal
Assistant Director for
Legislative Reference
Enclosures
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 27, 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR: MR. WARREN HENDRIKS
FROM:
WILLIAM E. TIMMONS
M.Jower
SUBJECT:
Action Memorandum - Log No. 533
Enrolled Bill S. 3703 - District of Columbia
Criminal Justice Code Amendment
The Office of Legislative Affairs concurs in the attached
proposal and has no additional recommendations.
Attachment
FORD is LIBRARY 076839
THE WHITE HOUSE
ACTION MEMORANDUM
WASHINGTON
LOG NO.: 533
:
Date: August 26, 1974
Time:
9:30 a. m.
FOR ACTION: James Cavanaugh
CC (for information): Warren K. Hendriks
Andre Buckles
Jerry Jones
Phil Buchen
Bill Timmons
FROM THE STAFF SECRETARY
DUE: Date: Tuesday, August 27, 1974
Time:
2:00 p.m.
SUBJECT:
Enrolled Bill S. 3703 - District of Columbia Criminal
Justice Code amendment
ACTION REQUESTED:
For Necessary Action
XX For Your Recommendations
Prepare Agenda and Brief
Draft Reply
For Your Comments
Draft Remarks
REMARKS:
Please return to Kathy Tindle West Wing
PLEASE ATTACH THIS COPY TO MATERIAL SUBMITTED.
If you have any questions or if you anticipate a
delay in submitting the required material, please
telephone the Staff Secretary immediately.
Warren K. Hendriks
For the President
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT:
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
AUG 2 3 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
Subject: Enrolled Bill S. 3703 - District of Columbia
Criminal Justice Code amendment
Sponsor - Sen. Eagleton (D) Missouri
Last Day for Action
Purpose
To provide for representation of indigent defendants in
criminal cases in the District of Columbia.
Agency Recommendations
Office of Management and Budget
Approval
District of Columbia Government
Approval
Department of Justice
Approval
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts
No objection
Discussion
The enrolled bill would amend the D.C. Criminal Code to provide
for development and operation by the Joint Committee on Judicial
Administration of a plan for furnishing representation for indi-
gent defendants in D.C. courts. The bill would cover a defend-
ant financially unable to obtain adequate legal representation
who is charged with an offense for which the Constitution or
D.C. law would require representation, who is under arrest when
representation is required, who is charged with parole or pro-
bation violation, who is subject to proceedings relating to
hospitalization of mentally ill, and who is a juvenile delinquent.
2
S. 3703 would further provide for provision of limited ancillary
services such as investigative or expert services necessary to
an adequate defense.
The enrolled bill would authorize appropriation of such sums
as may be necessary during fiscal years 1975 and 1976. Further,
the bill would provide for retroactivity to July 1, 1974.
In its report on S. 3703, the House Committee on the District
of Columbia stated that in previous years defense for the in-
digent was provided under the Criminal Justice Act. However,
the Court Reform and Criminal Procedure Act of 1970 transferred
local criminal jurisdiction from Federal to D.C. courts and
that:
"With the full implementation of the District of
Columbia Court Reform and Criminal Procedure Act,
the Administrative Office of the United States
Courts, the United States Judicial Conference, and
the Chief Justice of the United States have taken
the position that the Superior Court of the District
of Columbia and the District of Columbia Court of
Appeals are not the rightful beneficiaries of the
Criminal Justice Act
"In March of this year funds were exhausted from
which counsel for indigent defendants could be
paid."
Since the Constitution requires legal representation in certain
cases, the Committee stated:
"If counsel is not available, the court will ultimately
have to discontinue the conduct of criminal and juvenile
delinquent proceedings."
The Committee describes this legislation as obviating either
confinement without trial or release pending trial.
The D.C. Government had requested legislation overhauling the
entire indigent defendant representation system. The Committee
agreed to S. 3703 "as a temporary measure to provide legislative
authorization for the pending appropriation item in the D.C.
budget providing funds urgently required to continue the counsel
program.'
3
The D.C. Government estimates the cost of the program at about
$2.3 million in fiscal year 1975. Such amount is included in
the House passed D.C. appropriation bill.
neefred H Romard
Assistant Director for
Legislative Reference
Enclosures
DIRECT OF COLUMBIN
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
WALTER E. WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20004
Mayor-Commissioner
August 21, 1974
Mr. Wilfred H. Rommel
Assistant Director for
Legislative Reference
Office of Management and Budget
Washington, D.C. 20503
Dear Mr. Rommel:
This is in reference to a facsimile of an enrolled
enactment of Congress entitled:
S. 3703 - To authorize in the District of
Columbia a plan providing for the repre-
sentation of defendants who are financially
unable to obtain an adequate defense in
criminal cases in the courts of the Dis-
trict of Columbia, and for other purposes.
The enrolled bill, which may be cited as the "District
of Columbia Criminal Justice Act", amends Title 11 of
the District of Columbia Code by adding thereto a chap-
ter 26 authorizing the Joint Committee on Judicial
Administration to place in operation, within ninety
days after the date of enactment of the bill, a plan
to provide for the appointment of attorneys to furnish
representation before the Superior Court of the Dis-
trict of Columbia and the District of Columbia Court
of Appeals for persons who are financially unable to
retain counsel in specified criminal cases and pro-
ceedings involving in general the potential loss of
one's liberty. The plan would include counsel and
investigative, expert, and other services, and would
include also the use of private attorneys, attorneys
furnished by the existing Public Defender Service, and
attorneys and students participating in clinical pro-
grams. The plan to be established pursuant to the
authority of the enrolled bill would replace applicable
provisions of the Criminal Justice Act of 1964 and in-
terim appropriation measures under which private at-
torneys representing indigents before the local courts
of the District of Columbia were compensated through
June 30, 1974.
Under the new section 11-2602 of the D.C. Code, as
added by S. 3703, the selection of attorneys to fur-
nish representation would be made from panels of
attorneys designated or approved by the local courts.
The new section 11-2604 would provide compensation
to attorneys appointed under the plan at a rate fixed
by the Joint Committee on Judicial Administration.
The hourly rate of compensation and the maximum
amount of compensation to be paid an appointed at-
torney would be established at a rate and in amounts
not in excess of those set forth in section 3006A(d)
of title 18, United States Code (Criminal Justice
Act) for corresponding kinds of cases or proceedings.
The new section 11-2607 would authorize the Joint
Committee on Judicial Administration to annually
prepare and submit to the Commissioner, in accor-
dance with existing procedures, an estimate of the
amount needed to compensate private attorneys for
furnishing representation in matters to which they
are appointed. The new section 11-2608 authorizes
out of moneys credited to the District of Columbia
appropriations to administer the Act for fiscal years
1975 and 1976. It is estimated that approval of
S. 3703 will result in a cost to the District of ap-
proximately $2.3 million in fiscal year 1975.
Section 3 of the enrolled bill makes inapplicable to
the Superior Court of the District of Columbia and
the District of Columbia Court of Appeals the provi-
sions of the Criminal Justice Act of 1964 which after
the date of enactment will apply only to representa-
tion of defendants before the Federal courts of the
District. Section 4 provides an effective date for
the bill upon the date of enactment, but authorizes
compensation for persons appointed to represent in-
digents on or after July 1, 1974 but prior to the
commencing date of the plan in accordance with its
provisions.
- 2 -
On April 23, 1974 the District Government submitted
to the Congress a proposed "District of Columbia
Defender Services Act", which was introduced in the
House of Representatives as H.R. 14374. While H.R.
14374 and S. 3703 are similar in objective-to insure
that defendants and respondents who are financially
unable to obtain an adequate defense in criminal
cases and proceedings before the courts of the Dis-
trict of Columbia are provided representation-they
differ materially in the method of providing such
representation. H.R. 14374 would, inter alia, have
established a District of Columbia Defender Service
to combine in a single agency, acting under an in-
dependent Board of Trustees, the existing private
attorney and Public Defender Service programs;
authorized representation of indigent defendants
before the Federal courts of the District of Co-
lumbia on a reimbursable basis; and unified the
functions of planning, selection of attorney panels,
preparation of budgets, payment of compensation to
private attorneys, and administration in an inde-
pendent agency of the District Government.
Although we believe that H.R. 14374 would have
offered the most beneficial and effective means
of providing adequate legal representation for
persons financially unable to retain counsel, we
note that the new section 11-2609 of the D.C. Code
will make inapplicable to chapter 26 the provisions
of section 602(a)(4) of the District of Columbia
Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization
Act which prohibit the Council of the District of
Columbia from enacting any act or resolution re-
lating to the organization or jurisdiction of the
District of Columbia courts. Accordingly, after
January 2, 1975, the Council of the District of
Columbia will be able to inquire anew into the
entire matter of representation of indigent de-
fendants by private attorneys and public defen-
ders and make such determinations as it deems
appropriate.
The District Government recommends the approval of
S. 3703.
Sincerely yours,
WALTER E. WASHINGTON
Mayor-Commissioner
- 3 -
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
Department of Bustice
Washington, D.C. 20530
AUG 2 2 1974
Honorable Roy L. Ash
Director, Office of Management and
Budget
Washington, D. C. 20503
Dear Mr. Ash:
In compliance with your request, I have examined a
facsimile of the enrolled bill (S. 3703), "District of
Columbia Criminal Justice Act."
The bill would authorize the courts of the District
of Columbia to establish a plan for the reimbursement of
counsel for indigent defendants. At the present time the
Criminal Justice Act (18 U.S.C. $3006A) authorizes the
Judicial Council of the District of Columbia and the
District of Columbia Court of Appeals to jointly approve
such a plan for the District. S. 3703 would make the
Criminal Justice Act inapplicable to the Superior Court
of the District of Columbia and the District of Columbia
Court of Appeals. Instead those jurisdictions would come
within the purview of a plan to be promulgated for the
District of Columbia courts by the Joint Committee on
Judicial Administration. The parameters of the plan, out-
lined in S. 3703, are similar to those found in the
Criminal Justice Act. Thus except for transferring the
authority for a plan for the D. C. courts from the
Judicial Council and Court of Appeals to the Joint Com-
mittee, S. 3703 does not differ materially from the
Criminal Justice Act.
In the past this Department has supported the utili-
zation of public funds for the provision of legal services
to indigent defendants. Accordingly, the Department of
Justice recommends Executive approval of this bill.
Sincerely,
Wincest Rokestraw
W. Vincent Bakestraw
Assistant Attorney General
Office of Legislative Affairs
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES COURTS
SUPREME COURT BUILDING
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20544
ROWLAND F. KIRKS
DIRECTOR
August 23, 1974
WILLIAM E. FOLEY
DEPUTY DIRECTOR
Mr. W. H. Rommel
Assistant Director for
Legislative Reference
Office of Management and Budget
Washington, D. C.
Dear Mr. Rommel:
This will acknowledge receipt of your memorandum
transmitting for our views and recommendations enrolled
bill S. 3703, "To authorize in the District of Columbia
a plan providing for the representation of defendants
who are financially unable to obtain an adequate defense
in criminal cases in the courts of the District of
Columbia, and for other purposes."
S. 3703 emanates from a proposal made to the
Congress by the Judicial Conference of the United States.
The bill as enacted differs, however, in one important
and unfortunate aspect from the recommendation of the
Judicial Conference. In amending the Criminal Justice
Act of 1964 (18 U.S.C. 3006 (A)) in subsection 11-2609 the
Congress prevents the federal courts in the District of
Columbia of availing themselves of the provisions of
subsection (h) of section 1 of the Criminal Justice Act
and thus precludes the establishment for the exclusive use
of the federal courts of either a federal public defender
agency or a community defender agency. Both the Judicial
Conference and this office have expressed opposition to this
restriction but inasmuch as the basic legislation achieves
a purpose much desired by the Judicial Conference, no objection
to Executive approval will be interposed.
Sincerely,
William (iiin Deputy Director E. Foley foly
THE WHITE HOUSE
ACTION MEMORANDUM
WASHINGTON
LOG NO.: 533
:
Date: August 26, 1974
Time:
9:30 a.m.
FOR ACTION: James Cavanaugh
CC (for information): Warren K. Hendriks
Andre Buckles
Jerry Jones
Phil Buchen
Bill Timmons
FROM THE STAFF SECRETARY
DUE: Date: Tuesday, August 27, 1974
Time:
2:00 p.m.
SUBJECT:
Enrolled Bill S. 3703 - District of Columbia Criminal
Justice Code amendment
ACTION REQUESTED:
For Necessary Action
XX For Your Recommendations
Prepare Agenda and Brief
Draft Reply
For Your Comments
Draft Remarks
REMARKS:
Please return to Kathy Tindle West Wing
No objection
D.C.
PLEASE ATTACH THIS COPY TO MATERIAL SUBMITTED.
If you have any questions or if you anticipate a
FORD VIBRARY
delay in submitting the required material, please
telephone the Staff Secretary immediately.
Warren K. Hendriks
For the President
THE WHITE HOUSE
ACTION MEMORANDUM
WASHINGTON
LGG NO.: 533
Date: August 26, 1974
Time:
9:30 a. m.
FOR ACTION: James Cavanaugh
CC (for information): Warren K. Hendriks
Andre Buckles
Jerry Jones
Phil Buchen
Bill Timmons
Geoff Shepard
FROM THE STAFF SECRETARY
DUE: Date: Tuesday, August 27, 1974
Time:
2:00 p. m.
SUBJECT:
Enrolled Bill S. 3703 - District of Columbia Criminal
Justice Code amendment
ACTION REQUESTED:
For Necessary Action
XX For Your Recommendations
Prepare Agenda and Brief
Draft Reply
For Your Comments
Draft Remarks
REMARKS:
Please return to Kathy Tindle - West Wing
approve
G.C.S.
PLEASE ATTACH THIS COPY TO MATERIAL SUBMITTED.
FORD & ave LIBRARY
If you have any questions or if you anticipate a
delay in submitting the required material, please
K. E. COLE, JR.
intephone the Stall Securiary immediately.
For the President
THE WHITE HOUSE
ACTION MEMORANDUM
WASHINGTON
LOG NO.: 533
:
Date: August 26, 1974
Time:
9:30 a. m.
FOR ACTION: James Cavanaugh
CC (for information): Warren K. Hendriks
Andre Buckles
Jerry Jones
Phil Buchen
Bill Timmons
FROM THE STAFF SECRETARY
DUE: Date: Tuesday, August 27, 1974
Time:
2:00 p.m.
SUBJECT:
Enrolled Bill S. 3703 - District of Columbia Criminal
Justice Code amendment
ACTION REQUESTED:
For Necessary Action
XX For Your Recommendations
Prepare Agenda and Brief
Draft Reply
For Your Comments
Draft Remarks
REMARKS:
Please return to Kathy Tindle - - West Wing
No Objection AWB AMB
PLEASE ATTACH THIS COPY TO MATERIAL SUBMITTED.
If you have any questions or if you anticipate a
delay in submitting the required material, please
telephone the Staff Secretary immediately.
Warren K. Hendriks
For the President
THE WHITE HOUSE
ACTION MEMORANDUM
WASHINGTON
LOG NO.: 533
Date: August 26, 1974
Time:
9:30 a. m.
FOR ACTION: James Cavanaugh
cc (for information): Warren K. Hendriks
Andre Buckles
Jerry Jones
Phil Buchen
Bill Timmons
FROM THE STAFF SECRETARY
DUE: Date: Tuesday, August 27, 1974
Time:
2:00 p.m.
SUBJECT:
Enrolled Bill S. 3703 - District of Columbia Criminal
Justice Code amendment
ACTION REQUESTED:
For Necessary Action
XX For Your Recommendations
Prepare Agenda and Brief
Draft Reply
For Your Comments
Draft Remarks
REMARKS:
Please return to Kathy Tindle - West Wing
8V31
Approve
MAY
PLEASE ATTACH THIS COPY TO MATERIAL SUBMITTED.
If you have any questions or if you anticipate a
FORD & GIVE LIBRARY
delay in submitting the required material, please
telephone the Staff Secretary immediately.
Warren K. Hendriks
For the President
93D CONGRESS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
REPORT
2d Session
No. 93-1172
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT
JULY 2, 1974.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State
of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. DIGGS, from the Committee on the District of Columbia,
submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany S. 3703]
The Committee on the District of Columbia, to whom was referred
the bill (S. 3703) to authorize in the District of Columbia a plan pro-
viding for the representation of defendants who are financially unable
to obtain an adequate defense in criminal cases in the courts of the
District of Columbia, and for other purposes, having considered the
same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend
that the bill as amended do pass.
The amendment strikes out all after the enacting clause and inserts
a substitute text which appears in italic type in the reported bill.
PURPOSE OF BILL
The purpose of the bill (S. 3703) is to provide a plan to insure that
persons charged with crimes in the District of Columbia, who are
financially unable to obtain an adequate defense in the courts of the
District of Columbia are provided with legal representation. The bill
establishes a plan for furnishing such representation and a mechanism
for appointment and compensation of counsel.
BACKGROUND
In previous years payments for lawyers representing indigent de-
fendants under a court appointment were reimbursed through the plan
established by the Criminal Justice Act (18 U.S.C. 3006A). That Act
was specifically applicable to the District of Columbia. Since the Court
Reform and Criminal Procedure Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 473) with its
transfer of local criminal jurisdiction from the United States District
Court to the local District of Columbia Court system, it has been the
position of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts and
the Judicial Conference of the United States to transfer the responsi-
38-006
2
bility for the indigent defenders program to that local court system.
The Administrative Office of the United States Courts took the posi-
tion in Committee hearings held on the need for funds for the Crim-
inal Justice Act, that it was willing to fund the program until the end
of the 1974 fiscal year. At that point the program would have to be
included in the District of Columbia budget for fiscal 1975. The Dis-
trict of Columbia Government agreed to this proposal. Accordingly,
authorizing legislation (H.R. 14376 and S. 3703) was required to
legitimate the transfer.
NEED FOR LEGISLATION
The United States Supreme Court in its 1972 decision, in the case
of Argersinger V. Hamlin (407 U.S. 25), required that counsel be
appointed in any case where there exists the possibility of the depriva-
tion of liberty. With the full implementation of the District of Colum-
bia Court Reform and Criminal Procedure Act however, the Adminis-
trative Office of the United States Courts, the United States Judicial
Conference, and the Chief Justice of the United States have taken the
position: that the Superior Court of the District of Columbia and the
District of Columbia Court of Appeals are not the rightful benefici-
aries of the Criminal Justice Act of 1964 (18 U.S.C. 3006A), which has,
up until now, been the source of funds for reimbursement of counsel
appearing before the local D.C. courts.
In March of this year the available funds were exhausted from
which counsel for indigent defendants could be paid. As a result, the
D.C. Superior Court Trial Lawyers Association announced that they
would be unable to accept appointments to defend an indigent unless
there was some assurance of compensation. The D.C. courts, respond-
ing in the best way that they could, asked for volunteers, and decided
that they would order the private bar to provide counsel for defense
if volunteers were insufficient. Such a system, however, is an emergency
system and cannot be expected to work or be relied upon in the long
run. The reported legislation is intended to provide authorization for
a viable, local, indigent-defender system in the District of Columbia.
The Constitution, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, requires that
every defendant in a criminal or juvenile delinquent proceeding be
represented by counsel. If counsel is not available, the court will ulti-
mately have to discontinue the conduct of criminal and juvenile de-
linquent proceedings. Whether this action would mean that all indi-
viduals affected would be held in confinement until counsel were found
or, as appears more likely, that they would be released pending solu-
tion of this problem-both alternatives are highly unpalatable. This
legislation seeks to prevent the necessity of dealing with either of
those possibilities.
SUMMARY OF MAJOR PRÓVISIONS OF THE BILL
The bill creates a new Chapter 26, Title II of the District of Colum-
bia Code to provide for representation of indigents in criminal cases
in the District of Columbia courts. It creates a plan for the furnishing
of legal representation to indigents in cases where they are subject to
the possibility of loss of liberty or where federal or local law requires
H.R. 1172
3
such representation. Counsel furnishing representation under the plan
shall be selected from panels designated or approved by the courts.
Counsel is to be provided for the duration of the complete judicial
process with compensation to be fixed approximately parallel to that
of the Federal Criminal Justice Act (18 U.S.C. 3006A). The bill also
provides for compensation for ancillary services necessitated by the
defense. The bill specifically provides for qualified law students to be
included in its coverage in the light of Mr. Justice Powell's concurring
opinion in the Argersinger case wherein he cited the availability of
such student-in-court programs as being an excellent resource to tap.
The budget estimate for the program will be submitted by the Joint
Committee on Judicial Administration.
The legislation repeals the applicability of the Federal Criminal
Justice Act (18 U.S.C. 3006A) to the District of Columbia. The Dis-
trict of Columbia Council is given the authority to make modifica-
tions in only this chapter of Title II.
HISTORY
Hearings on the proposed legislation (H.R. 14374 and H.R. 14376)
were held by the Subcommittee on the Judiciary on June 13, 1974.
Testimony in support of the legislation was presented by representa-
tives of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, the
Chief Judges of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, and the
District of Columbia Superior Court, the District of Columbia Cor-
poration Council, the Director of the Public Defender Service, and
by representatives of the District of Columbia Unified Bar, the Dis-
trict of Columbia Bar Association, and the Washington Bar Associa-
tion. No testimony was given nor statements filed in opposition to the
objective of providing counsel for indigent defendants.
The Subcommittee reported the bill, H.R. 14376, as amended, on
June 24, 1974.
H.R. 14374 provides for a complete overhaul of the system by which
indigent defendants are provided legal representation. On the other
hand, the reported bill, S. 3703 (companion to H.R. 14376) merely
provides the authorization for a continuation of the current system
under the auspices of the Joint Committee on Judicial Administration.
The Subcommittee agreed to S. 3703 as a temporary measure to pro-
vide legislative authorization for the pending appropriation item in
the D.C. budget providing funds urgently required to continue the
counsel program. The Full Committee concurred in this recommenda-
tion and ordered, reported S. 3703 in lieu of H.R. 14376.
VOTE
The bill, S. 3703, was ordered favorably reported to the House on
July 1, 1974, by a voice vote, a quorum being present.
Cost
The District of Columbia estimates the cost of this program for
fiscal year 1975 will be $2.3 million, and approximately such an amount
is included in the D.C. appropriation bill which recently passed the
H.R. 1172
4
House. The Committee anticipates similar amounts for the ensuing
fiscal years.
CONCLUSION
By this legislation, the Committee has endeavored to insure that
indigent persons in the District of Columbia will receive adequate
legal representation in the courts as is guaranteed by the Constitution.
It is important to note that the representation of indigents is a
crucial part of the criminal justice system, and it is the view of this
Committee that budgetary priorities should be effectively arranged to
underscore the necessity for defender services to all indigents in the
District and to insure that they are adequately funded. Failure to do
SO may well have a deleterious effect on the criminal justice system in
the District of Columbia, to the detriment of the community as a
whole.
JUDICIAL RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE LEGISLATION
The recommendations of the Joint Committee on Judicial Admin-
istration in the District of Columbia, as presented to the Committee by
Judge Gerard D. Reilly, Chief Judge of the District of Columbia
Court of Appeals, in transmitting the proposed legislation which be-
came H.R. 14376, follows:
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS,
Washington, D.C., April 19, 1974.
Hon. CHARLES C. DIGGS, Jr.,
Chairman, Committee on the District of Columbia, House of Repre-
sentatives, Washington, D.O.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN : I am herewith transmitting for the considera-
tion of the House Committee on the District of Columbia proposed
legislation which would establish a plan for providing representation
of defendants who are financially unable to retain defense counsel in
criminal cases in the courts of the District. This draft bill has been pre-
pared by the Joint Committee on Judicial Administration in the Dis-
trict of Columbia, established by D.C. Code 1973, § 11-1701. If enacted,
it would repeal the provision in the Criminal Justice Act which makes
that statute applicable to cases in the District of Columbia courts (i.e.,
subsection (1) of 18 U.S.C. 3006A) and create in lieu thereof a similar
act covering only the District of Columbia Court of Appeals and the
Superior Court. Such legislation would provide statutory authoriza-
tion for a requested appropriation of $2,300,000, now pending before
the House Appropriations Committee, as an item included in the
Mayor-Commissioner's budget estimate for fiscal year 1975.
The need for this legislation is compelling for the whole system of
criminal justice in this jurisdiction is threatened with breakdown as a
result of the exhaustion of funds appropriated for the current fiscal
year to pay counsel for representing indigent defendants in our courts.
Since early March, Chief Judge Greene and I have had to resort to
a makeshift plan for drafting lawyers. We are rapidly approaching a
day when these efforts will be unavailing, as the staff of the Public
Defender Service and experienced private trial counsel are already
H.R. 1172
5
burdened with an excessive number of assignments. In the meantime,
the Federal Judicial Conference has remained adamant in its posi-
tion against including in its budget estimate any proposal for supple-
mental appropriations to meet the obligations incurred by our courts
for appointments of private counsel in the fiscal years 1973 and 1974.
Continuation of this situation into the next fiscal year would be in-
tolerable. Consequently, in order to expedite passage of an authoriza-
tion bill the enclosed draft proposes no change in the structure or op-
eration of the Public Defender Service. In other words, the Joint
Committee at the present time is making no recommendations for
amendments to Chapter 22, Title 2, of the D.C. Code, as the pending
D.C. budget estimate for the Service has already been formulated on
the basis of this existing statutory framework.
Accordingly, the revised legislative proposal of the Joint Commit-
tee simply fills the gap created by the absence of any federal budget
estimate for the payment of fees of private counsel, transcripts and
other expenses. It follows the same scales of compensation prescribed
by the Federal Criminal Justice Act, but by repealing the subsection
of that statute making it applicable to the District of Columbia courts
and authorizing direct appropriations for this purpose to the District
government, it precludes the raising of possible points of order to the
1975 budget estimate.
We recognize, of course, that the proposed bill is something of a
stopgap measure, for some revisions of the laws relating to the Public
Defender Service should eventually be considered by Congress. At
present. however, there are SO many conflicating views as to what
should be done in this respect, particularly as the Federal Judicial
Conference for this circuit last month authorized appointment of a
committee to study the matter, we believe that to include in the au-
thorization bill controversial proposals on this subject might result
in postponing until the next fiscal year passage of this much needed
legislation.
My colleagues and I shall be available at any time should the Com-
mittee decide to set the matter down for hearing.
Faithfully yours,
GERARD D. REILLY,
Chairman, Joint Committee on Judicial
Administration in the District of Columbia.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Sec. 11-2601. Plan for Furnishing Representation of Indigents in
Criminal Cases
This section provides a plan for furnishing representation to in-
digents in criminal cases. The Joint Committee on Judicial Adminis-
tration of the local courts is required to place into operation in the
District of Columbia a plan for furnishing representation to persons
in the District of Columbia who are financially unable to obtain ade-
quate representation when they are charged with crimes and for whom
the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution requires the appointment of
Counsel; or for whom, in a case in which he faces loss of liberty, the
local law requires the appointment of counsel.
H.R. 1172
6
Representation must be provided to indigents in all felony or mis-
demeanor cases where the United States Attorney prosecutes or would
prosecute were the defendant not a juvenile, and in all cases of indigent
persons under arrest where representation is required by law. Repre-
sentation must also be provided for persons charged with violation of
parole or probation, or in custody as a material witness cases or seek-
ing collateral relief. Those classes of collateral relief include remedies
on a motion attacking sentence, extradition, habaes corpus and com-
mitment of mentally ill persons while serving sentence. Case repre-
sentation under the plan includes counsel, investigative, experts and
other services, if necessary.
The plan is required to include a provision for private attorneys,
attorneys provided by the Public Defender Service, and attorneys and
qualified students who are participating in clinical programs.
Sec. 11-2602. Appointment of Counsel.
This section provides a plan for selecting counsel from panels of
attorneys designated or approved by the courts. Every defendant in
every criminal case must be advised that he is entitled to be repre-
sented by counsel, and counsel shall be appointed for him if he is finan-
cially unable to afford it. Such appointment may be made retroactive
to includé representation provided prior to appointment under the
plan. Separate counsel may be appointed when appropriate. This is
to ensure that when cases of co-defendants should be severed for rea-
sons of law that there will be compensation available for separate
counsel.
Sec. 11-2603. Duration and Substitution of Appointments.
This section provides that persons for whom counsel is appointed
shall be represented at every stage of the proceedings from initial ap-
pearance before the court through appeals, including ancillary matters
appropriate to the proceeding. It further provides that the court may
terminate the appointment of counsel should the individual become
financially able to provide it. The court is given the discretion in the
interest of justice to substitute one appointed counsel for another at
any point in the proceedings.
Sec. 11-2604. Payment for Representation.
This section provides for a payment schedule to be established by
the Joint Committee on Judicial Administration, not to exceed the
hourly scale established under the Federal Criminal Justice Act, Title
18 of the United States Code, Section 3006A (d). Attorneys shall be
reimbursed for expenses reasonably incurred. This section further
provides for maximum amounts to be paid to attorneys, not to exceed
the maximum amounts established under the Federal Criminal Justice
Act, Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 3006A (d) (2), unless
special circumstances warrant a waiver of the limit. Currently, these
maximum amounts are $1,000 for a felony case and $400 for misde-
meanors. It also provides a procedure for filing claims for compensa-
tion and reimbursement by affidavit. New trials are deemed to be new
cases for compensation purposes. Representation in the District of
Columbia Court of Appeals will be provided without prepayment of
fees and cost.
H.R. 1172
7
Sec. 11-2605. Services Other Than Counsel.
This section provides compensation for services other than legal
counsel. Counsel for a person who is financially unable to obtain in-
vestigative, expert or other services necessary for adequate defense
may request such services in an ex parte application. The court may
then, if it finds such services to be necessary, authorize counsel to ob-
tain such services. Counsel appointed under this section may obtain,
subject to later review, investigative, expert or other services, exclud-
ing the preparation of reporter's transcript, without prior authoriza-
tion, if necessary for adequate defense. There is a maximum amount
schedule established with a waiver if necessary.
Sec. 11-2606. Receipt of Other Payments.
Whenever the courts find funds are available for payment for
counsel services from a third party, it may direct that such funds
be paid to the appointed attorney, or to any person or organization
authorized to render investigative, expert or other services or de-
posited in the Treasury as reimbursement for the appropriation of
such funds.
Sec. 11-2607. Preparation of Budget.
This section requires the Joint Committee on Judicial Adminis-
tration to annually prepare and submit to the Commissioner of the
District of Columbia its estimate of the amount needed for furnish-
ing representation by private attorneys for persons entitled to rep-
resentation under this act. The Joint Committee is required to estab-
lish definitional standards for indigency to qualify for the program
and to take into account the number of indigent cases which can be
handled by the Public Defender Service, private attorneys, and by
law students, and to take into account the number of cases in the
United States courts for which payment was made under the last
appropriation for the administration of the Criminal Justice Act in
those courts. The request shall not exceed the appropriation for the
prosecution of those represented.
Sec. 11-2608
The District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Re-
organization Act prohibits the D.C. Council from modifying any
provisions of Title II of the D.C. Code. This section, as amended,
would give the Council the authorization to change any part of
chapter 26 of Title 11 relating to a plan providing for the representa-
tion of indigent defendents. It does not permit any other change to
be made in any other section of the chapter or of Title 11.
Sec. 11-2609. Authorization of Appropriations.
The appropriation language authorizes funds to be appropriated
out of any money in the Treasury to the credit of the District of
Columbia in such sums as may be necessary for the administration
of this plan. Such appropriations remain available until expended.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, as re-
H.R. 1172
8
ported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is
enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, existing law
in which no change is proposed is shown in roman) :
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CODE
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
TITLE 11.-ORGANIZATION AND JURISDICTION
OF THE COURTS
*
*
Chapter 26.-REPRESENTATION OF INDIGENTS
IN CRIMINAL CASES
Sec.
11-2601. Plan for furnishing representation to indigents in criminal cases.
11-2602. Appointment of counsel.
11-2603. Duration and substitution of appointments.
11-2604. Payment for representation.
11-2605. Services other than counsel.
11-2606. Receipt of other payments.
11-2607. Preparation of budget.
11-2608. Authorization of appropriations.
§ 11-2601. PLAN FOR FURNISHING REPRESENTATION OF INDIGENTS IN
CRIMINAL CASES
The Joint Committee on Judicial Administration shall place in
operation in the District of Columbia a plan for furnishing represen-
tation to a person in the District of Columbia who is financially unable
to obtain adequate representation-
(1) who is charged with a felony or misdemeanor and the
United States Attorney prosecutes, or with juvenile delinquency
by the commission of an act which, if committed by an adult,
would be prosecuted by the United States Attorney;
(2) who is under arrest, when such representation is required
by law;
(3) who is charged with violating a condition of probation or
parole, in custody as a material witness, or seeking collateral re-
lief, as provided in-
(a) section 110 of title 23 of the District of Columbia Code
(remedies on motion attacking sentence),
(b) chapter 7 of title 23 of the District of Columbia Code
(extradition and fugitives from justice),
(c) chapter 19 of title 16 of the District of Columbia Code
(habeas corpus),
(d) section 928 of the Act of March 8, 1901 (D.C. Code, sec.
24-302) (commitment of mentally ill person while serving sen-
tence), or
(4) for whom the sixth amendment to the Constitution requires
the appointment of counsel or for whom, in a case in which he faces
loss of liberty, any local law requires the appointment of counsel. Rep-
resentation under the plan shall include counsel and investigative,
H.R. 1172
9
expert, and other services necessary for an adequate defense. The plan
shall include a provision for private attorneys, attorneys furnished
by the Public Defender Service, and attorneys and qualified students
participating in clinical programs.
§ 11-2602. APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
Counsel furnishing representation under the plan shall be selected
from panels of attorneys designated or approved by the courts. In
every criminal case in which a person may be appointed counsel un-
der this chapter the court shall advise the defendant that he is en-
titled to be represented by counsel and that counsel will be appointed
for him if he is financially unable to obtain counsel. Unless the de-
fendant waives representation by counsel, the court, if satisfied after
appropriate inquiry that the defendant is financially unable to obtain
counsel, shall appoint counsel to represent him. Such appointment
may be made retroactive to include any representation furnished pur-
suant to the plan prior to appointment. The court shall appoint sepa-
rate counsel for defendants having interests that cannot properly be
represented by the same counsel, or when other good cause is shown.
§ 11-2603. DURATION AND SUBSTITUTION OF APPOINTMENTS
A person for whom counsel is appointed shall be represented at every
stage of the proceedings from his initial appearance before the court
through appeals, including ancillary matters appropriate to the pro-
ceedings. If at any time after the appointment of counsel the court
finds that the person is financially able to obtain counsel or to make
partial payment for the representation, it may terminate the appoint-
ment of counsel or authorize payment as provided in section 2606 of
this chapter, as the interests of justice may dictate. If at any stage of
the proceedings, including an appeal, the court finds that the person
is financially unable to pay counsel whom he had retained, it may ap-
point counsel as provided in section 2602, and authorize payment as
provided in section 2604, as the interests of justice may dictate. The
court may, in the interest of justice, substitute one appointed counsel
for another at any stage of the proceedings.
§ 11-2604. PAYMENT FOR REPRESENTATION
(1) Hourly rate.-Any attorney appointed pursuant to this chapter
shall, at the conclusion of the representation or any segment thereof,
be compensated at a rate fixed by the Joint Committee on Judicial Ad-
ministration, not to exceed the hourly scale established by the provi-
sions of title 18 United States Code, section 3006A (d). Such attorney
shall be reimbursed for expenses reasonably incurred.
(2) aximum amounts.-For representation of a defendant before
the Superior Court or before the District of Columbia Court of Ap-
peals, as the case may be, the compensation to be paid to an attorney
shall not exceed the maximum amounts established by title 18, United
States Code, section 3006A (d) (2) in the corresponding kind of case
or proceeding.
(3) Vaiving maximum amounts.-Payment in excess of any maxi-
mum amount provided in subsection (2) of this section may be made
for extended or complex representation whenever the Superior Court
H.R. 1172
10
in which the representation was rendered, certifies that the amount of
the excess payment is necessary to provide fair compensation and the
payment is approved by the chief judge of the District of Columbia
Court of Appeals.
(4) Filing claims.-A separate claim for compensation and reim-
bursement shall be made to the Superior Court for representation be-
fore that court, and to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals
for representation before that court. Each claim shall be supported
by a sworn written statement specifying the time expended, services
rendered, and expenses incurred while the case was pending before
the court, and the compensation and reimbursement applied for or re-
ceived in the same case from any other source. The court shall fix the
compensation and reimbursement to be paid to the attorney. In cases
where representation is furnished other than before the Superior
Court or the D.C. Court of Appeals, claims shall be submitted to the
Superior Court which shall fix the compensation and reimbursement
to be paid.
(5) New trials.-For pùrposes of compensation and other pay-
ments authorized by this section, an order by a court granting a new
trial shall be deemed to initiate a new case.
(6) Proceedings before Appellate Court.-If a person for whom
counsel is appointed under this section appeals to the District of
Columbia Court of Appeals, he may do so without prepayment of
fees and costs or security therefor and without filing the affidavit re-
quired by 1915 (a) of title 28 of the United States Code.
§ 11-2605. SERVICES OTHER THAN COUNSEL
(1) Upon request.-Counsel for a person who is financially unable
to obtain investigative, expert, or other services necessary for an ade-
quate defense may request them in an ex parte application. Upon
finding, after appropriate inquiry in an ex parte proceeding, that the
services are necessary and that the person is financially unable to
obtain them, the court shall authorize counsel to obtain the services.
(2) Without prior request.-Counsel appointed under this section
may obtain, subject to later review, investigative, expert, or other
services, excluding the preparation of reporter's transcript, without
prior authorization if necessary for an adequate defense. The total
cost of services obtained without prior authorization may not exceed
$150 or the rate provided by title 18, United States Code, section
3006A (e) (2) whichever is higher, and expenses reasonably incurred.
(3) M aximum amounts.-Compensation to be paid to a person for
services rendered by him to a person under this subsection shall not
exceed $300, or the rate provided by title 18, United States Code, sec-
tion 3006A (e) (3), whichever is higher, exclusive of reimbursement
for expenses reasonably incurred, unless payment in excess of that
limit is certified by the court, as necessary to provide fair compensa-
tion for services of an unusual character or duration, and the amount
of the excess payment is approved by the chief judge of the District
of Columbia Court of Appeals.
H.R. 1172
11
§ 11-2606. RECEIPT OF OTHER PAYMENTS
Whenever the court finds that funds are available for payment
from or on behalf of a person furnished representation, it may author-
ize or direct that such funds be paid to the appointed attorney, or to
any person or organization authorized by section 2605 to render inves-
tigative, expert, or other services, or to the court for deposit in the
Treasury as a reimbursement to the appropriation, current at the time
of payment, to carry out the provisions of this section. Except as so au-
thorized or directed, no such person or organization may request or
accept any payment or promise of payment for representing a defend-
ant.
§ 11-2607. PREPARATION OF BUDGET
(a) The Joint Committee shall annually prepare and submit to the
Commissioner of the District of Columbia, or to his successor in accord-
ance with section 445 of the District of Columbia Self-Government and
Governmental Reorganization Act, its estimate of the amount needed
for furnishing representation by private attorneys to persons entitled
to representation in accordance with section 2601 (b) of this title.
(b) In making its computation of such estimate, the Joint Commit-
tee shall-
(1) issue and follow definitional standards with respect to
financial inability to obtain adequate legal representation;
(2) estimate the respective percentage of indigent defendant
cases which can be effectively handled by the Public Defender
Service, private attorneys, and qualified law students participat-
ing in clinical programs under attorney supervision;
(3) take into account the number of cases in the United States
courts for which payment was made under the last appropriation
for the administration of the Criminal Justice Act in such courts
and the proportion which such number bears to the estimated num-
ber of such cases in the District of Columbia courts for the par-
ticular fiscal year;
(4) shall not request an amount to be paid private attorneys
for representation pursuant to section 2601 of this title in excess
of the estimated appropriation for the prosecution of those persons
thus represented.
§ 11-2608. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS
There are authorized to be appropriated for each fiscal year, out of
any moneys in the Treasury credited to the District of Columbia, such
sums as are necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter. Unless
otherwise specified in appropriations Acts, such appropriations shall
remain available until expended. Disbursements from such appropria-
tions to persons entitled to payments, pursuant to orders of the courts,
under this Act, shall be made by the executive officer of said courts,
subject to the supervision of the fiscal officer of the District of
Columbia.
H.R. 1172
12
TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE
*
*
*
*
§ 3006A. ADEQUATE REPRESENTATION OF DEFENDANTS
(a) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
[(1) Applicability in the District of Columbia.-The provisions of
this Act, other than subsection (h) of section 1, shall be applicable in
the District of Columbia. The plan of the District of Columbia shall
be approved jointly by the Judicial Council of the District of Colum-
bia Circuit and the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.]
*
*
*
*
H.R. 1172
Calendar No. 934
93D CONGRESS
SENATE
REPORT
2d Session
No. 93-966
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT
JUNE 26, 1974.-Ordered to be printed
Mr. EAGLETON, from the Committee on the District of Columbia,
submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany S. 3703]
The Committee on the District of Columbia, having had under
consideration legislation to authorize in the District of Columbia a
plan providing for the representation of defendants who are financially
unable to obtain an adequate defense in criminal cases in the courts
of the District of Columbia, reports an original bill and recommends
that it do pass.
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
The purpose of S. 3703 is to authorize the District of Columbia
court system to set up a plan to reimburse counsel for indigent de-
fendants similar to the one previously authorized under the Criminal
Justice Act (18 U.S.C. 3006A.).
NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION
In previous years payments to counsel acting on behalf of indigent
defendants under court appointment were reimbursed under the
Criminal Justice Act. However, since the transfer of local criminal
jurisdiction to the District of Columbia court system, it has been
the desire of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts to
transfer responsibility for what has become a local court system to the
local authorities. Accordingly, authorizing legislation is needed for
appropriations to pay counsel. If this is not done, sufficient attorneys
cannot be obtained to afford accused indigent persons the right to a
speedy trial under the Constitution and many criminal cases which
would otherwise be successfully prosecuted in the District of Columbia
will be dismissed.
99-010
2
HISTORY
S. 3475 and S. 3478 were introduced in the Senate on May 9, 1974.
Hearings were held on these two bills on June 5, 1974. Witnesses on
these bills included Chief Judge Harold H. Greene of the D.C. Superior
Court, Judge Frank Q. Nebeker of the D.C. Court of Appeals, D.C.
Corporation Counsel C. Frank Murphy on behalf of the Mayor-
Commissioner, Mr. Samuel Dash, Chairman of the Board of Trustees
of the Public Defender Service, and Mr. David Austern on behalf of
the D.C. Bar Association.
Witnesses at the hearings were split as to which of the two ap-
proaches contained in the two bills would be more desirable. S. 3478
approaches the problem by placing responsibility for the furnishing
of counsel in an expanded Public Defender Service which would have
responsibility for supervising appointed counsel in individual cases.
This approach had the backing of the District Government and the
Public Defender Service. S. 3475 represents a local Criminal Justice
Act solution to the problem on a permanent basis. It was backed by
the Joint Committee on Judicial Administration of the D.C. Courts.
The unified Bar of the District of Columbia has appointed a special
committee to look into the entire problem posed by the appointment
of counsel for indigent defendants and indicated that it would prefer
for legislation to be temporary and that Congress or the District of
Columbia Council should have the benefit of their report prior to the
enactment of permanent legislation.
The committee is convinced that a temporary extension of the
present type of program is the most advisable course of action at this
time. The arguments for and against the present system are in need
of the careful analysis that is being undertaken by the Bar Association.
However, in the interim there must be some program. The present
program is operating relatively successfully and a two-year extension
will not and should not, in the committee's view, prejudice the case
for change that some wish to make.
Accordingly, the committee is reporting to the Senate an original
bill, S. 3703 which creates for two years a program modeled after the
federal Criminal Justice Act program. This legislation is applicable
only to the local courts and is not intended to change the relationship
of the Public Defender Service to the D.C. Courts. Nor does the
reporting of S. 3703 indicate that the committee has decided at this
time which of the two approaches contained in S. 3475 and S. 3478 is
more desirable as a permanent solution for the District of Columbia.
COMMITTEE VOTE
The bill, S. 3703, was approved unanimously by the committee on
June 26, 1974.
COST
The enactment of this legislation will involve an expected annual
expenditure in each of the two fiscal years involved of $2.3 million.
Changes in the current fee schedule, changes in the mix between public
defenders and private attorneys, or changes in judicial review of pay-
ments to private attorneys could alter this estimate.
S.R. 966
3
CHANGES MADE IN EXISTING LAW BY THE BILL AS REPORTED
In compliance with subsection 4 of rule XXIX of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill as
reported are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is
enclosed in black brackets; new matter is printed in italic; existing
law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman):
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CODE
TITLE II.-ORGANIZATION AND JURISDICTION OF THE COURTS
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Chapter 26.-REPRESENTATION OF INDIGENTS IN
CRIMINAL CASES
Sec.
11-2601. Plan for furnishing representation of indigents in criminal cases.
11-2602. Appointment of counsel.
11-2603. Duration and substitution of appointments.
11-2604. Payment for representation.
11-2605. Services other than counsel.
11-2606. Receipt of other payments.
11-2607. Preparation of budget.
11-2608. Authorization of appropriations.
§ 11-2601. Plan for furnishing representation of indigents in
criminal cases
The Joint Committee on Judicial Administration shall place in
operation in the District of Columbia a plan for furnishing representation
to a person in the District of Columbia who is financially unable to obtain
adequate representation-
(1) who is charged with a felony or misdemeanor, or other offence
for which the sixth amendment to the Constitution requires the
appointment of counsel or for whom, in a case in which he faces
loss of liberty, any law or the District of Columbia requires the
appointment of counsel;
(2) who is under arrest, when such representation is required
by law;
(3) who is charged with violating a condition of probation or
parole, in custody as a material witness, or seeking collateral relief,
as provided in-
(A) Section 23-110 of the District of Columbia Code (remedies
on motion attacking sentence),
(B) Chapter 7 of title 23 of the District of Columbia Code
(extradition and fugitives from justice),
(C) Chapter 19 of title 16 of the District of Columbia Code
(habeas corpus),
(D) Section 928 of the Act of March 8, 1901 (D.C. Code,
sec. 24-302) (commitment of mentally ill person while serving
sentence);
(4) who is subject to proceedings pursuant to chapter 5, title 21, of
the District of Columbia Code (hospitalization of the mentally ill); or
(5) who is a juvenile and alleged to be delinquent or in need of
supervision.
S.R. 966
4
Representation under the plan shall include counsel and investigative,
expert, and other services necessary for an adequate defense. The plan
shall include a provision for private attorneys, attorneys furnished by the
Public Defender Service, and attorneys and qualified students participating
in clinical programs.
§ 11-2602. Appointment of counsel
Counsel furnishing representation under the plan shall in every case
be selected from panels of attorneys designated and approved by the courts.
In all cases where a person faces a loss of liberty and the Constitution
or any other law requires the appointment of counsel, the court shall
advise the defendant or respondent that he has the right to be represented
by counsel and that counsel will be appointed to represent him if he is
financially unable to obtain counsel. Unless the defendant or respondent
waives representation by counsel, the court, if satisfied after appropriate
inquiry that the defendant or respondent is financially unable to obtain
counsel, shall appoint counsel to represent him. Such appointment may
be made retroactive to include any representation furnished pursuant to
the plan prior to appointment. The court shall appoint separate counsel
for defendants or respondents having interests that cannot properly be
represented by the same counsel, or when other good cause is shown. In
all cases covered by this Act where the appointment of counsel is dis-
cretionary, the defendant or respondent shall be advised that counsel
may be appointed to represent him if he is financially unable to obtain
counsel, and the court shall in all such cases advise the defendant or re-
spondent of the manner and procedures by which he may request the
appointment of counsel.
§ 11-2603. Duration and substitution of appointments
A person for whom counsel is appointed shall be represented at every
stage of the proceedings from his initial appearance before the court through
appeals, including ancillary matters appropriate to the proceedings. If at
any time after the appointment of counsel the court finds that the person is
financially able to obtain counsel or to make partial payment for the repre-
sentation, it may terminate the appointment of counsel or authorize pay-
ment as provided in section 2606 of this chapter, as the interests of justice
may dictate. If at any stage of the proceedings, including an appeal, the
court finds that the person is financially unable to pay counsel whom he
had retained, it may appoint counsel as provided in section 2602, and
authorize payment as provided in section 2604, as the interests of justice
may dictate. The court may, in the interest of justice, substitute one ap-
pointed counsel for another at any stage of the proceedings.
§ 11-2604. Payment for representation
(1) HOURLY RATE.-Any attorney appointed pursuant to this chapter
shall, at the conclusion of the representation or any segment thereof, be
compensated at a rate fixed by the Joint Committee on Judicial Admin-
istration, not to exceed the hourly scale established by the provisions of
section 3006A(d)( (1) of title 18, United States Code. Such attorney shall
be reimbursed for expenses reasonably incurred.
(2) MAXIMUM AMOUNTS.-For representation of a defendant before
the Superior Court or before the District of Columbia Court of Appeals,
as the case may be, the compensation to be paid to an attorney shall not
exceed the maximum amounts established by section 3006A(d) (2) of title
18, United States Code, in the corresponding kind of case or proceeding.
S.R. 966
5
(3) WAIVING MAXIMUM AMOUNTS.-Claims for compensation and
reimbursement in excess of any maximum amount provided in subsection
(2) of this section may be approved for extended or complex representation
whenever such payment is necessary to provide fair compensation. Any
such request for payment shall be submitted by the attorney for approval
by the chief judge of the Superior Court upon recommendation of the pre-
siding judge in the case or, in cases before the District of Columbia Court
of Appeals, approval by the chief judge of the Court of Appeals upon
recommendation of the presiding judge in the case. A decision shall be
made by the appropriate chief judge in the case of every claim filed under
this subsection.
(4) FILING CLAIMS.-A separate claim for compensation and reim-
bursement shall be made to the Superior Court for representation before
that court, and to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals for representa-
tion before that court. Each claim shall be supported by a sworn written
statement specifying the time expended, services rendered, and expenses
incurred while the case was pending before the court, and the compensation
and reimbursement applied for or received in the same case from any other
source. The court shall fix the compensation and reimbursement to be paid
to the attorney. In cases where representation is furnished other than before
the Superior Court or the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, claims
shall be submitted to the Superior Court which shall fix the compensation
and reimbursement to be paid.
(5) NEW TRIALS.-For purposes of compensation and other pay-
ments authorized by this section, an order by a court granting a new trial
shall be deemed to initiate a new case.
(6) PROCEEDINGS BEFORE APPELLATE COURT.-If a person for whom
counsel is appointed under this section appeals to the District of Columbia
Court of Appeals, he may do so without prepayment of fees and costs or
security therefor and without filing the affidavit required by section 1915(a)
of title 28, United States Code.
§ 11-2605. Services other than counsel
(1) UPON REQUEST.-Counsel for a person who is financially unable
to obtain investigative, expert, or other services necessary for an adequate
defense may request them in an ex parte application. Upon finding, after
appropriate inquiry in an ex parte proceeding, that the services are neces-
sary and that the person is financially unable to obtain them, the court
shall authorize counsel to obtain the services.
(2) WITHOUT PRIOR REQUEST.-Counsel appointed under this sec-
tion may obtain, subject to later review, investigative, expert, or other
services, excluding the preparation of reporter's transcript, without prior
authorization if necessary for an adequate defense. The total cost of
services obtained without prior authorization may not exceed $150 or the
rate provided by section 3006A(e) (2) of title 18, United States Code,
whichever is higher, and expenses reasonably incurred.
(3) MAXIMUM AMOUNTs.-Compensation to be paid to a person for
services rendered by him to a person under this subsection shall not exceed
$300, or the rate provided by section 3006A(e) (3) of title 18, United
States Code, whichever is higher, exclusive of reimbursement for expenses
reasonably incurred, unless payment in excess of that limit is certified
by the court, as necessary to provide fair compensation for services of an
unusual character or duration, and the amount of the excess payment is
approved by the presiding judge in the case.
S.R. 966
6
§ 11-2606. Receipt of other payments
"(a) Whenever the court finds that funds are available for payment
from or on behalf of a person furnished representation, it may authorize
or direct that such funds be paid to the appointed attorney, or to any person
or organization authorized pursuant to section 2605 of this title to render
investigative, expert, or other services, or to the court for deposit in the
Treasury as a reimbursement to the appropriation, current at the time of
payment, to carry out the provisions of this section. Except as so author-
ized or directed, no such person or organization may request or accept any
payment or promise of payment for representing a defendant.
(b) Any person compensated, or entitled to be compensated, by the
Service for any services rendered under this chapter who shall seek, ask,
demand, receive, or offer to receive, any money, goods, or services in return
therefore from or on behalf of a defendant or respondent shall be fined not
more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
§ 11-2607. Preparation of Budget
The joint committee shall prepare and annually. submit to the Com-
missioner of the District of Columbia, in conformity with section 11-1743
of this title, or to his successor in accordance with section 445 of the District
of Columbia Self Government and Governmental Reorganization Act, for
inclusion in the annual budget, annual estimates of the expenditures and
appropriations necessary for furnishing representation by private at-
torneys to persons entitled to representation in accordance with section
2601 of this title.
§ 11-2608. Authorization of appropriations
There are hereby authorized to be appropriated to the District of
Columbia such funds as may be necessary for the administration of this
chapter for fiscal years 1975 and 1976. When so specified in appropriation
Acts, such appropriations shall remain available until expended.
UNITED STATES CODE
TITLE 18.-CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
*
*
*
*
§ 3006A. ( ) Applicability in the District of Columbia.-The pro-
visions of this Act, other than subsection (b) of section 1, [shall be ap-
plicable in the District of Columbia. The plan of the District of
Columbia shall be approved jointly by the Judicial Council of the
District of Columbia Circuit and the District of Columbia Court of
Appeals. shall apply in the United States District Court for the District
of Columbia and the United States Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit. The provisions of this Act shall not apply to the Su-
perior Court of the District of Columbia and the District of Columbia
Court of Appeals.
S.R. 966
=
FORD
&
QTV
S. 3703
Ainety-third Congress of the United States of America
AT THE SECOND SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday, the twenty-first day of January,
one thousand nine hundred and seventy-four
An Act
To authorize in the District of Columbia a plan providing for the representation
of defendants who are financially unable to obtain an adequate defense in
criminal cases in the courts of the District of Columbia, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may
be cited as the "District of Columbia Criminal Justice Act".
SEC. 2. Title 11 of the District of Columbia Code is amended by
adding at the end thereof the following new chapter:
"Chapter 26.-REPRESENTATION OF INDIGENTS IN
CRIMINAL CASES
"Sec.
"11-2601. Plan for furnishing representation to indigents in criminal cases.
"11-2602. Appointment of counsel.
"11-2603. Duration and substitution of appointments.
"11-2604. Payment for representation.
"11-2605. Services other than counsel.
"11-2606. Receipt of other payments.
"11-2607. Preparation of budget.
"11-2608. Authorization of appropriations.
"11-2609. Authority of council.
"§ 11-2601. Plan for furnishing representation of indigents in
criminal cases
"The Joint Committee on Judicial Administration shall place in
operation, within ninety days after the effective date of this chapter,
in the District of Columbia a plan for furnishing representation to
any person in the District of Columbia who is financially unable to
obtain adequate representation-
(1) who is charged with a felony, or misdemeanor, or other
offense for which the sixth amendment to the Constitution requires
the appointment of counsel or for whom, in a case which he faces
loss of liberty, any law of the District of Columbia requires the
appointment of counsel;
" (2) who is under arrest, when such representation is required
by law;
(3) who is charged with violating a condition of probation or
parole in custody as a material witness, or seeking collateral relief,
as provided in-
(A) Section 23-110 of the District of Columbia Code
(remedies on motion attacking sentence),
(B) Chapter 7 of title 23 of the District of Columbia
Code (extradition and fugitives from justice),
"(C) Chapter 19 of title 16 of the District of Columbia
Code (habeas corpus),
"(D) Section 928 of the Act of March 8, 1901 (D.C. Code,
sec. 24-302) (commitment of mentally ill person while serv-
ing sentence) ;
"(4) who is subject to proceedings pursuant to chapter 5 of
title 21 of the District of Columbia Code (hospitalization of the
=
FORD
07/0
S. 3703
Ainety-third Congress of the United States of America
AT THE SECOND SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday, the twenty-first day of January,
one thousand nine hundred and seventy-four
An Act
To authorize in the District of Columbia a plan providing for the representation
of defendants who are financially unable to obtain an adequate defense in
criminal cases in the courts of the District of Columbia, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may
be cited as the "District of Columbia Criminal Justice Act".
SEC. 2. Title 11 of the District of Columbia Code is amended by
adding at the end thereof the following new chapter:
"Chapter 26.-REPRESENTATION OF INDIGENTS IN
CRIMINAL CASES
"Sec.
"11-2601. Plan for furnishing representation to indigents in criminal cases.
"11-2602. Appointment of counsel.
"11-2603. Duration and substitution of appointments.
"11-2604. Payment for representation.
"11-2605. Services other than counsel.
"11-2606. Receipt of other payments.
"11-2607. Preparation of budget.
"11-2608. Authorization of appropriations.
"11-2609. Authority of council.
"§ 11-2601. Plan for furnishing representation of indigents in
criminal cases
"The Joint Committee on Judicial Administration shall place in
operation, within ninety days after the effective date of this chapter,
in the District of Columbia a plan for furnishing representation to
any person in the District of Columbia who is financially unable to
obtain adequate representation-
(1) who is charged with a felony, or misdemeanor, or other
offense for which the sixth amendment to the Constitution requires
the appointment of counsel or for whom, in a case which he faces
loss of liberty, any law of the District of Columbia requires the
appointment of counsel;
(2) who is under arrest, when such representation is required
by law;
(3) who is charged with violating a condition of probation or
parole in custody as a material witness, or seeking collateral relief,
as provided in-
(A) Section 23-110 of the District of Columbia Code
(remedies on motion attacking sentence),
(B) Chapter 7 of title 23 of the District of Columbia
Code (extradition and fugitives from justice),
"(C) Chapter 19 of title 16 of the District of Columbia
Code (habeas corpus),
"(D) Section 928 of the Act of March 8, 1901 (D.C. Code,
sec. 24-302) (commitment of mentally ill person while serv-
ing sentence) ;
"(4) who is subject to proceedings pursuant to chapter 5 of
title 21 of the District of Columbia Code (hospitalization of the
mentally ill) ;
"(5) who is a juvenile and alleged to be delinquent or in need
of supervision.
Representation under the plan shall include counsel and investigative,
expert, and other services necessary for an adequate defense. The
plan shall include provision for private attorneys, attorneys fur-
S. 3703-2
nished by the Public Defender Service, and attorneys and qualified
students participating in clinical programs.
"§ 11-2602. Appointment of counsel
"Counsel furnishing representation under the plan shall in every
case be selected from panels of attorneys designated and approved
by the courts. In all cases where a person faces a loss of liberty and
the Constitution or any other law requires the appointment of counsel,
the court shall advise the defendant or respondent that he has the
right to be represented by counsel and that counsel will be appointed
to represent him if he is financially unable to obtain counsel. Unless
the defendant or respondent waives representation by counsel, the
court, if satisfied after appropriate inquiry that the defendant or
respondent is financially unable to obtain counsel, shall appoint coun-
sel to represent him. Such appointment may be made retroactive to
include any representation furnished pursuant to the plan prior to
appointment. The court shall appoint separate counsel for defendants
or respondents having interests that cannot properly be represented
by the same counsel, or when other good cause is shown. In all cases
covered by this Act where the appointment of counsel is discretionary,
the defendant or respondent shall be advised that counsel may be
appointed to represent him if he is financially unable to obtain coun-
sel, and the court shall in all such cases advise the defendant or
respondent of the manner and procedures by which he may request
the appointment of counsel.
"§ 11-2603. Duration and substitution of appointments
"A person for whom counsel is appointed shall be represented at
every stage of the proceedings from his initial appearance before the
court through appeals, including ancillary matters appropriate to
the proceedings. If at any time after the appointment of counsel the
court finds that the person is financially able to obtain counsel or to
make partial payment for the representation, it may terminate the
appointment of counsel or authorize payment as provided in section
2606 of this chapter, as the interests of justice may dictate. If at any
stage of the proceedings, including an appeal, the court finds that
the person is financially unable to pay counsel whom he had retained,
it may appoint counsel as provided in section 2602, and authorize
payment as provided in section 2604, as the interests of justice may
dictate. The court may, in the interest of justice, substitute one
appointed counsel for another at any stage of the proceedings.
"§ 11-2604. Payment for representation
(a) Any attorney appointed pursuant to this chapter shall, at
the conclusion of the representation or any segment thereof, be com-
pensated at a rate fixed by the Joint Committee on Judicial Admin-
istration, not to exceed the hourly scale established by the provisions
of section 3006A (d) (1) of title 18, United States Code. Such attorney
shall be reimbursed for expenses reasonably incurred.
(b) For representation of a defendant before the Superior Court
or before the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, as the case may
be, the compensation to be paid to an attorney shall not exceed the
maximum amounts established by section 3006A (d) (2) of title 18,
United States Code, in the corresponding kind of case or proceeding.
(c) Claims for compensation and reimbursement in excess of any
maximum amount provided in subsection (b) of this section may be
approved for extended or complex representation whenever such pay-
ment is necessary to provide fair compensation. Any such request
for payment shall be submitted by the attorney for approval by the
chief judge of the Superior Court upon recommendation of the presid-
ing judge in the case or, in cases before the District of Columbia Court
S. 3703-3
of Appeals, approval by the chief judge of the Court of Appeals upon
recommendation of the presiding judge in the case. A decision shall
be made by the appropriate chief judge in the case of every claim
filed under this subsection.
"(d) A separate claim for compensation and reimbursement shall
be made to the Superior Court for representation before that court,
and to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals for representation
before that court. Each claim shall be supported by a sworn written
statement specifying the time expended, services rendered, and
expenses incurred while the case was pending before the court, and
the compensation and reimbursement applied for or received in the
same case from any other source. The court shall fix the compensation
and reimbursement to be paid to the attorney. In cases where repre-
sentation is furnished other than before the Superior Court or the
District of Columbia Court of Appeals, claims shall be submitted to
the Superior Court which shall fix the compensation and reimburse-
ment to be paid.
"(e) For purposes of compensation and other payments authorized
by this section, an order by a court granting a new trial shall be deemed
to initiate a new case.
"(f) If a person for whom counsel is appointed under this section
appeals to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, he may do SO
without prepayment of fees and costs or security therefor and without
filing the affidavit required by section 1915(a) of title 28, United
States Code.
"§ 11-2605. Services other than counsel
"(a) Counsel for a person who is financially unable to obtain investi-
gative, expert, or other services necessary for an adequate defense may
request them in an ex parte application. Upon finding, after appro-
priate inquiry in an ex parte proceeding, that the services are neces-
sary and that the person is financially unable to obtain them, the court
shall authorize counsel to obtain the services.
"(b) Counsel appointed under this section may obtain, subject to.
later review, investigative, expert, or other services, excluding the prep-
aration of reporter's transcript, without prior authorization if neces-
say for an adequate defense. The total cost of services obtained without
prior authorization may not exceed $150 or the rate provided by section
3006A (e) (2) of title 18, United States Code, whichever is higher, and
expenses reasonably incurred.
(c) Compensation to be paid to a person for services rendered by
him to a person under this subsection shall not exceed $300, or the rate
provided by section 3006A (e) (3) of title 18, United States Code,
whichever is higher, exclusive of reimbursement for expenses reason-
ably incurred, unless payment in excess of that limit is certified by the
court, as necessary to provide fair compensation for services of an
unusual character or duration, and the amount of the excess payment
is approved by the presiding judge in the case.
"§ 11-2606. Receipt of other payments
"(a) Whenever the court finds that funds are available for payment
from or on behalf of a person furnished representation, it may author-
ize or direct that such funds be paid to the appointed attorney, or
to any person or organization authorized pursuant to section 2605 of
this title to render investigative, expert, or other services, or to the
court for deposit in the Treasury as a reimbursement to the appropria-
tion, current at the time of payment, to carry out the provisions of this
section. Except as SO authorized or directed, no such person or organiza-
tion may request or accept any payment or promise of payment for
representing a defendant.
S. 3703-4
"(b) Any person compensated, or entitled to be compensated, for
any services rendered under this chapter who shall seek, ask, demand,
receive, or offer to receive, any money, goods, or services in return there-
for from or on behalf of a defendant or respondent shall be fined not
more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
"§ 11-2607. Preparation of Budget
"The joint committee shall prepare and annually submit to the Com-
missioner of the District of Columbia, in conformity with section 1743
of this title, or to his successor in accordance with section 445 of the
District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Reorgani-
zation Act, for inclusion in the annual budget, annual estimates of the
expenditures and appropriations necessary for furnishing representa-
tion by private attorneys to persons entitled to representation in
accordance with section 2601 of this title.
"§ 11-2608. Authorization of appropriations
"There are hereby authorized to be appropriated, out of any moneys
in the Treasury credited to the District of Columbia, such funds as
may be necessary for the administration of this chapter for fiscal years
1975 and 1976. When SO specified in appropriation Acts, such appropri-
ations shall remain available until expended.
"§ 11-2609. Authority of Council
"Section 602(a) (4) of the District of Columbia Self-Government
and Governmental Reorganization Act shall not apply to this chapter."
SEC. 3. (a) Paragraph (1) of section 3006A, title 18, United States
Code, as amended, is amended to read
(1) APPLICABILITY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.-The provisions
of this Act, other than subsection (h) of section 1, shall apply in the
United States District Court for the District of Columbia and the
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
The provisions of this Act shall not apply to the Superior Court of the
District of Columbia and the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.'
SEC. 4. This Act shall take effect upon the date of its enactment. Any
person appointed on or after July 1, 1974, but prior to the commencing
date of the plan referred to in section 11-2601 of the District of
Columbia Code (as added by section 2 of this Act), by a judge of the
Superior Court or the District of Columbia Court of Appeals to furnish
to any person in the District of Columbia, who is financially unable
to obtain adequate representation, that representation and those
services referred to in such section 11-2601, may be compensated and
reimbursed for such representation and services rendered. including
expenses incurred therewith, upon filing a claim for payment. Pay-
ment shall not be allowed in excess of the amounts authorized in
accordance with those sections added to the District of Columbia Code
by such section 2.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Vice President of the United States and
President of the Senate.
August 22, 1974
Dear Mr. Director:
The following bills were received at the White
House on August 22nd:
S. 1871
H.R. 14402
S. 3703
H.R. 14920
H.R. 6485
H.R. 15205
H.R. 11864
H.R. 15842
Please let the President have reports and
recommendations as to the approval of these
bills as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
Robert D. Linder
Chief Executive Clerk
The Honorable Roy L. Ash
Director
Office of Management and Budget
Washington, D. C.