Doug Colbert Speaks To Clinic Interns
By Professor John J. Francis
On March 16, 2004, the Law Clinic welcomed scholar in residence, Doug Colbert, who was visiting from the University of Maryland Law School. Professor Colbert was on campus for most of the week, sharing his insight and experience on a number of topics. When talking to the Clinic interns, his approach was, not surprisingly, practice oriented. Referencing the Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Professor Colbert reminded the clinic interns that one of our professional responsibilities is to work for systemic reform when we observe the need. With that lead in, he related a project undertaken by clinical students at the University of Maryland under his supervision.
While handling criminal defense cases, Professor Colbert's students observed that many defendants charged with relatively minor offenses were being held in custody while awaiting trial. Under then existing Maryland law, defendants were not entitled to representation at bail hearings. Moreover, these hearings were taking place via video teleconference. Consequently, judges were making decisions of liberty without an attorney presenting salient arguments and without even seeing the defendant in person. When asked what information the defendants wanted to present to the court on the issue of bail, most began talking about the facts of the case. Of course, the court would interject and advise them that anything they say can be used against them at trial. The defendants, not having had the benefit of a criminal procedure class, were not focusing on the legal issues relevant to a bail hearing (such as community ties and likelihood of return to court). Consequently, without adequate information on these issues, the court often detained defendants who might in fact have been eligible for release if they had someone to present the proper information to the court.
This problem was exacerbated by the fact that after that initial bail hearing, the defendants would not appear in court again for another thirty days. Often, the minor cases were dismissed or resolved with non-jail dispositions. This meant that people who were not ultimately facing jail were being held in jail while awaiting court appearances. During this time, they were losing jobs, falling behind on rent and unable to support their families.
Professor Colbert's students recognized this systemic problem and decided to do something about it. They launched the Access to Justice Program. Under the pilot program, attorneys were appointed to defendants at bail hearings in Baltimore City. Statistics were kept which showed that people were more than twice as likely to be released from custody without bail if they had an attorney than if they didn't. Armed with statistics about jail overcrowding, financial impact that widespread pretrial detention had on the county, and Sixth Amendment arguments, the clinic students and Professor Colbert successfully lobbied to change the laws governing right to counsel at bail hearings.
Professor Colbert's purpose in relating these events was not to pat himself on the back. Rather, it was to reinforce the importance of our professional responsibilities and to demonstrate that attorneys – even ones who are still law students – wield great power, can make a systemic impact on justice issues and are an integral component of our profession.
