A U.S. appeals court panel ruled 2-1 that defendants in Oregon must be released from jail after seven days if they do not have a defense attorney representing them.
The federal panel said Oregon is responsible for upholding legal protections for criminal defendants.
The appeal’s court decision upheld a preliminary injunction previously issued by U.S. District Judge Michael McShane in 2023. It was filed by 10 people who were charged, didn’t have a court-appointed public defender, and who were being held at a Washington County jail.
U.S. Circuit Judge John Owens, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, wrote for the majority. He said the state is violating the landmark 1963 Court ruling Gideon v. Wainwright, which found that people have the constitutional right to have a defense attorney even if they can’t afford a lawyer.
“Yet, due to an ‘ongoing public defense crisis’ of its own creation, Oregon does not provide indigent criminal defendants their fundamental right to counsel despite Gideon’s clear command,” the judge wrote.
“For several reasons, there are not enough qualified attorneys in Oregon to represent criminal defendants, some of whom remain detained without counsel,” Judge Owens wrote.
“Even worse, Oregon cannot proceed in prosecuting these defendants ‘unless and until an attorney is appointed to represent’ them. Accordingly, an innocent person may languish in jail for months awaiting trial, simply because no lawyer has been provided to review or investigate his case.”
He also wrote that Oregon’s system is reminiscent of an “autocratic regime in the Soviet bloc” in the 1970s.
“Unfortunately, we do not need to go back in time or across an ocean to witness this Kafkaesque scene,” he wrote. “This is the State of Oregon in 2024.”
“It’s an embarrassment to the state,” Judge McShane said during a hearing last year, according to Oregon Public Radio. “It’s a complete tragedy and nobody seems to have an answer. Literally we suspended the Constitution when it comes to this group.”
Oregon’s federal public defender, Fidel Cassino-DuCloux, said the May 31 decision “breathes life into the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, which has been an empty promise for too many presumptively innocent Oregonians charged with crimes.
‘I Fear the Coming Disorder’
In a dissenting opinion, U.S. Appeals Court Judge Patrick Bumatay criticized Judge McShane’s earlier injunction as well as the May 31 majority opinion by the 9th Circuit panel.He described both orders as “extreme” and “reckless,” adding that the appeals court is “complicit in a judicial jailbreak” and warned of potential consequences of releasing certain criminal defendants.
“And those being released are not sitting there for some petty offense,” Judge Bumatay wrote. “Just look at the charges of the named Petitioners here—they are accused of rape, kidnapping, strangulation, assaulting a police officer, public indecency, and burglary. All will now be released into Oregon’s communities.”
The dissenting judge warned that “this is not the end of it” because, according to him, “countless others will be released on an ongoing basis because the injunction applies prospectively.”
“To avoid the inevitable chaos, our court wisely paused the district court’s extraordinary order pending appeal. But that wisdom has run out,” Judge Bumatay said.
“The majority now endorses the release scheme, lifts the stay of the injunction, and lets it take immediate effect. By doing so, the Ninth Circuit is now complicit in a judicial jailbreak. I fear the coming disorder.”
He noted that the appeals court’s ruling is unprecedented.
“For the first time in our Nation’s history, we order the release of pretrial criminal defendants from jail based solely on a delay in appointing state-funded counsel,” the judge said.
The Epoch Times contacted the Oregon Department of Justice for comment.
The agency told Oregon Public Radio that the department is reviewing the appeals court’s decision, and it’s unclear if it will appeal.
