What independence did Vermont's Defender General owe to clients if political officials could influence the office?

Plain-English summary

The committee was asked whether possible service at the governor's pleasure changed the Defender General's duty to ensure independent counsel for indigent defendants and other eligible clients. It declined to decide how the appointment statute should be construed or whether attempted removal would unlawfully interfere with professional duties.

The opinion applied former Canon 5 and DR 5-107(B): a person who pays or employs a lawyer for another cannot direct that lawyer's professional judgment. It said the Defender General must resist political or other outside pressures that compromise defense work, seek resources needed for independent representation, and preserve the judgment of public defenders and assigned counsel. Its analysis drew on the defender statute, ABA defense standards, and decisions describing appointed counsel's duty to individual clients.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1991 under Vermont's former Code of Professional Responsibility. The Vermont Supreme Court's rules history states that the Rules of Professional Conduct applied to lawyer conduct after September 1, 1999. Later amendments or opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this opinion as historical context and verify current rules before relying on it.

Common questions

Q: Did the committee decide whether the governor could remove the Defender General?

A: No. It expressly left statutory tenure and removal questions unresolved while stating the professional independence duties of the serving officeholder.

Q: Could a political official direct an assigned defender's case judgment?

A: The opinion applied DR 5-107(B)'s ban on control by a person who pays or employs a lawyer for another and required protection of individual defenders' judgment.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interpreted former Canon 5, DR 5-107(B), and DR 7-101(A)(1) against 13 V.S.A. §§ 5252 and 5253 and the ABA Standards for Criminal Justice on defender independence.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Vermont Code of Professional Responsibility Canon 5, DR 5-107(B), and DR 7-101(A)(1)

Statutes:

• 13 V.S.A. §§ 5252 and 5253, Defender General appointment and duties

Cases:

• Ferri v. Ackerman, 440 U.S. 193 (1979), appointed counsel's undivided duty to the client
• Polk County v. Dodson, 454 U.S. 312 (1981), defender independence from state administration

See also

• Vermont Ethics Op. 93-01: Public defender furlough
• Vermont Ethics Op. 89-08: Agency counsel's client

Source

• Landing page: Vermont Bar Association public office opinions
• Original PDF: Opinion 91-05
• Vermont Supreme Court rules history, “These rules apply to lawyer conduct after September 1, 1999.”