Public defender talks pending cuts

BOISE — Idaho State Public Defender Eric Fredericksen informed the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee on Wednesday that budget cuts could upend his office’s positive trajectory.  

The Idaho Legislature initially created the State Public Defender Office in 2023 to address the long-running Tucker v. State of Idaho lawsuit by shifting from a county-by-county to a statewide public defense system. This change was rejected by some contracted attorneys, who withdrew from over 1,300 cases Oct. 1, 2024, the office’s first day. 

The mass withdrawal of cases required District Public Defenders to be in court daily as they shifted to managing contract work across Idaho’s counties. Since then, the office has “righted the ship,” reducing its vacancy rate from 20% to 7%.  

Even with recent improvements, the legal battle that initiated the office’s creation is still pending. 

The suit is now awaiting a decision from the Idaho Supreme Court, after the ACLU of Idaho and law firm Hogan Lovells filed it in 2015, alleging that Idaho’s public defense system violates the Sixth Amendment by failing to provide adequate legal counsel. 

Idaho’s Fourth Judicial District Court previously dismissed the case, saying if the new statewide system “works as promised, then every Idahoan wins.” If the promises made are not kept, a new suit can be filed against the system “if there is evidence that ‘widespread, persistent structural deficiencies’ exist,” District Judge Samuel Hoagland’s ruling said. 

“That’s a warning if we don’t continue to fund the system that we have in place,” Fredericksen said Wednesday. 

If pending JFAC-approved cuts are implemented, the office is poised to lose millions of dollars between the current and next fiscal years. 

For this fiscal year, a 4% holdback would cost the department $1.7 million, while a 5% holdback in 2027 would cost $2.2 million. The latter of which includes a $915,000 reduction in personnel costs, according to documents from the Legislative Services Office.  

Sen. Melissa Wintrow, D-Boise, questioned the impact of these cuts on both the pending lawsuit and the viability of public defense in the state.     

Fredericksen said the department could absorb cuts for the current fiscal year “without issue,” but the impact of larger cuts in the next fiscal year is more uncertain.  

The current expectation is that training for public defenders will be cut through a shift to online training and the elimination of certain specialized programs. As an example, Fredericksen said attorneys will no longer be able to partake in specialized out-of-state training for DUI cases “because we can’t afford it.” 

Fredericksen said his biggest concern is that contracted attorneys are being cut to meet budget requests. These contractors provide overflow staffing for offices across the state that aren’t fully staffed, helping prevent public defender caseloads from becoming too high and, in turn, affecting the representation of individuals who rely on public defenders for counsel. 

When these contractors are cut, caseloads will rise. When this increase becomes unsustainable, “we will start losing attorneys,” Fredericksen said. 

With personnel funding cuts already a possibility for the office, Sen. Scott Grow, R-Eagle, questioned the pay scale difference between public defenders and their prosecutor counterparts. 

"The criminal justice system only works when both sides are equally compensated," Fredericksen said. "Right now, the state of Idaho public defenders are paid less than the Ada County prosecutors, they are paid less than the Attorney General's office." 

County commissioners across the state have already raised the wages of their prosecutors, and, if the state wants an effective justice system, Fredericksen said it needs to do the same for public defenders.