Lawyers Free
One of the problems encountered by poor people who are facing the prospect of encountering legal problems is the challenge of attaining adequate legal representation. One way which the legal system ensures that there is an availability of a fair trial is through providing anyone facing criminal proceedings with a free lawyer. The Supreme Court case Miranda versus Arizona established what has since become known as a suspects “Miranda rights.” The Miranda ruling ensures that suspects must be mirandized, or have their rights read to them. The Supreme Court ruling said that “the person in custody must, prior to interrogation, be clearly informed that he or she has the right to remain silent, and that anything the person says will be used against that person in court; the person must be clearly informed that he or she has the right to consult with an attorney and to have that attorney present during questioning, and that, if he or she is indigent, an attorney will be provided at no cost to represent her or him.” The free attorney attained by the refusal to wave a suspect’s Miranda rights is often provided by legal aid society in different states.
A free attorney may also be an attorney providing pro bono work. A free lawyer who engages in pro bono works is a very specific type of volunteer. A free attorney donates their highly developed skills to a worthy cause. The American Bar Association recommends that a free attorney provide an average of fifty hours of pro bono work each year. In some large law firms, however, this level is rarely achieved. How often a firm provides a free lawyer is a measure which some ranking systems use to discourage recent law school graduates from joining some prominent national firms.
Legal aid, which is one of the most common sources employed by the indigent to acquire a free lawyer, has existed in the United States since the 1870s. The ability of a poor person to attain a free attorney was severely under funded throughout the Ninetieth Century, and remained that way for much of the Twentieth Century. In the early 1960s, however, the ability of the poor to attain access to a free lawyer was considered an important part of anti-poverty efforts. The 1963 Supreme Court case Gideon versus Wainwright ruled that a free attorney must be provided to any person facing criminal charges and unable to provide payment for one on their own. Prior to Gideon versus Wainwright the only time a free attorney was provided was if the suspect was facing capital charges.
Problems with the search for a free lawyer can been experienced by middle class person more often by the poor. These individuals may be too poor to hire a private lawyer, but make too much money to qualify for a free attorney from legal aid societies. One proposed solution is to require pro bono service of all lawyers, just as medical professions are required to provide treatment to any patient in an emergency room, regardless of ability to pay.