Laserfiche WebLink
JAN 5 1983 <br />F�,rF <br />Administrator Wright reluctantly recommended that we go <br />with the Public Defender's proposal. He believed there are <br />about 80 cases a month where we have to foot the bill and <br />anticipated that it would be considerably more expensive if <br />we followed the other route and let the Judge appoint the <br />attorneys to defend the indigent. <br />Commissioner Wodtke stated that he had no problem with <br />addressing this at budget time; he did, however, have a <br />great problem with the State taking this action in the <br />middle of the year and would just as soon let the Judge tell <br />the taxpayers they are going to have to pay for this. <br />Commissioner Fletcher wished to know the legal defini- <br />tion of an indigent. <br />Assistant Public Defender James Long reported that it <br />is based on income and number of dependents - a single <br />person who makes less than $100 a week is considered <br />indigent. If you are married with one dependent and make <br />over $120 per week, you are not considered indigent. Assets <br />are also taken into consideration, i.e., whether the person <br />owns a house, a car, has a bank account, etc. <br />Commissioner Fletcher asked if most of the indigents <br />are transient or resident, and Mr. Long believed most are <br />residents. <br />Commissioner Lyons noted that while there is a great <br />deal of wealth in this county, a large percentage of our <br />population is at or below poverty level. <br />Commissioner Scurlock had two questions regarding the <br />proposed contract, the first relating to who is handling the <br />liability insurance coverage, and the second in regard to <br />whether Judge Stikelether will continue to indicate the <br />Public Defender's Office will handle these cases or possibly <br />follow his other option. <br />Attorney Brandenburg reported that Mr. Smith has <br />indicated that the current malpractice insurance they have <br />C% <br />