Controversy in the US: defendants who do not have lawyers will be released in this state

The news that came from United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit It caused a great impact and much controversy among citizens. The recently mentioned entity confirmed a ruling that involves the accused who have been prisoners in Obregón for a minimum period of seven days without a defense attorney: it was resolved that they be released.

It is worth noting that, for years, Oregon did not give him public defenders to the criminal defendants, something that should have been done for a purely legal matter guaranteed by the US Constitution Neither more nor less, as detailed by the Oregon Judicial Departmentthere are more than 3,200 defendants who did not have their own lawyer, of which 146 were in custody.

In that sense, this Friday, the federal court classified the public defense system of Oregon like a “Sixth Amendment nightmare”, according to what they wrote in the official document. As expected, all this generated various opinions mainly on social networks: on the one hand, citizens who agreed with the ruling; while, on the other, there are groups that criticize the decision based on the concern of setting the accused free.

According to the information of the Protection Officer of the ship (OPB) in March Oregon already needed 500 lawyers more to be able to supply all the defendants and fulfill their obligations, a figure that may have even increased until last Friday when the ruling was announced.

Different voices on the Oregon controversy

“It brings to life the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, which has been an empty promise for too many presumably innocent Oregonians charged with crimes,” said Fidel Cassino-DuCloux, Oregon’s federal public defender, in a statement about the court’s ruling. last Friday.

And then he added: ““We hope that state authorities will heed the Ninth Circuit’s instructions that no one be held in prison without a lawyer and implement the decision without delay.”

For his part, Circuit Judge John Owens wrote: “Due to an ‘ongoing public defense crisis’ of its own creation, Oregon does not provide indigent criminal defendants with their fundamental right to a lawyer despite Gideon’s clear order. “I insisted on fighting for the solution.”

In contrast, another circuit judge, Patrick Bumatay, said that Judge Michael McShane’s injunction is “reckless and extreme,” stating that the Ninth Circuit “is now complicit in a judicial drain.”