As a result, relatively few judges and practitioners in the state have firsthand experience with this post conviction work. There is limited understanding of and appreciation for the role of post convictions in most areas of the state. In areas where the cases are heard rarely, if at all, the general assumption reported in our survey is that post conviction procedures provide adequate safeguards and effectively monitor the quality of representation. However, those with more familiarity with post conviction representation have a very different view. Geographically, in rural areas where prisons are seated, local judges and the state Indigent Defense Services Division report chronic difficulty finding competent attorneys willing to accept the cases for the funds allocated.
Funding is considered grossly inadequate to meet the challenges the cases present.
Overall, it appears that competent experienced attorneys are not interested in handling post conviction cases as presently compensated. The Task Force interviewed Steven Wax, the Federal Defender for the District of Oregon. His office represents persons convicted in the state courts who bring federal petitions for habeas corpus relief, the final level of review for most state court convictions. His perspective of the quality of representation provided to indigent clients across the state is a uniquely broad one. Mr. Wax has come to the conclusion that neither state post conviction nor federal habeas review adequately monitors state indigent defense representation.