Indigent defense: An application of conflict theory in the analysis of driving while intoxicated cases

The research tested several conflict propositions regarding the types of case outcomes received by defendants represented by appointed counsel. The data represented approximately 3,000 misdemeanor driving while intoxicated cases disposed in the Harris County Criminal Courts at Law between January 1 and August 31, 1999. Research hypothesis 1a asserted that defendants with appointed attorneys would be significantly less likely to receive dismissals than defendants with retained attorneys after controlling for relevant variables. Only 2% of the defendants with appointed attorneys received dismissals. Research hypothesis 1b contended that defendants with appointed attorneys would be significantly less likely to be acquitted than defendants with retained attorneys after controlling for relevant variables. None of the defendants with appointed attorneys received acquittals. Research hypothesis 1c predicted that defendants with appointed attorneys would be significantly more likely to be convicted than defendants with retained attorneys after controlling for relevant variables. Over 98.5% of the defendants with appointed counsel received convictions.;The data also provided strong support for the hypothesis which predicted that defendants with court-appointed attorneys would be significantly more likely to receive a sentence of jail only than defendants with retained attorneys after controlling for relevant variables. Over 94% of convicted indigent defendants received jail only sentences. Research hypothesis 2b predicted that defendants with court-appointed attorneys would be significantly more likely to receive a sentence of jail and fine than defendants with retained attorneys after controlling for relevant variables. The bivariate analysis provided little support for this assumption. Only 3.5% or 4 of the 113 defendants who received a sentence of jail and fine were represented by appointed attorneys. Research hypothesis 2c predicted that defendants with court-appointed attorneys would be significantly less likely to receive a sentence of probation and fine than defendants with retained attorneys after controlling for relevant variables. Strong support for this hypotheses was provided by the bivariate analysis of attorney-type and sentence-type. The data indicated 97.1% of probation and fine sentences were handed out to defendants represented by retained counsel.