Opinion ID: 2582199
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: CrR 3.1(f) Entitles Indigent Criminal Defendants Represented by Private Counsel to Necessary Expert Assistance.

Text: ¶ 9 The Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel includes expert assistance necessary to an adequate defense. See Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68, 72, 105 S.Ct. 1087, 84 L.Ed.2d 53 (1985). Washington discharges its obligation to provide indigent criminal defendants necessary expert assistance under CrR 3.1(f). See State v. Kelly, 102 Wash.2d 188, 201, 685 P.2d 564 (1984) (holding CrR 3.1(f)(1) incorporates constitutional requirements). Under CrR 3.1(f)(1), a defendant is entitled to the appointment of experts if financially unable to obtain them and if the services are necessary to the defense. State v. Hoffman, 116 Wash.2d 51, 90, 804 P.2d 577 (1991). ¶ 10 The plain language of CrR 3.1(f) makes no distinction between appointed and private counsel. It provides in relevant part: (1) A lawyer for a defendant who is financially unable to obtain investigative, expert, or other services necessary to an adequate defense in the case may request them by a motion to the court. (2) Upon finding the services are necessary and that the defendant is financially unable to obtain them, the court, or a person or agency to whom the administration of the program may have been delegated by local court rule, shall authorize the services. CrR 3.1(f)(1)-(2). Plain language `does not require construction.' State v. Delgado, 148 Wash.2d 723, 727, 63 P.3d 792 (2003) (quoting State v. Wilson, 125 Wash.2d 212, 217, 883 P.2d 320 (1994)). And nothing in CrR 3.1(f)(1)-(2) indicates any intention to deny expert assistance to indigent criminal defendants who manage to obtain pro bono representation or partially fund their own defense. ¶ 11 Indeed, CrR 3.1 expressly contemplates the likelihood of indigent criminal defendants partially funding their own defense. The ability to pay part of the cost of a lawyer shall not preclude assignment. The assignment of a lawyer may be conditioned upon part payment pursuant to an established method of collection. CrR 3.1(d)(2). Unsurprisingly, the State encourages criminal defendants to contribute to the cost of their defense whenever possible. ¶ 12 Additionally, guaranteeing expert assistance to indigent criminal defendants represented by private counsel is a sensible policy. It poses little risk of abuse because evaluation of the necessity of requested expert assistance to an adequate defense would remain within the discretion of the trial judge. See State v. Hoffman, 116 Wash.2d 51, 90, 804 P.2d 577 (1991). It supports the qualified right of criminal defendants to representation by the lawyer of their choice. See Wheat v. United States, 486 U.S. 153, 159, 108 S.Ct. 1692, 100 L.Ed.2d 140 (1988) (holding Sixth Amendment supports the right to select and be represented by one's preferred attorney). And it encourages criminal defendants to defray the cost of their defense, conserving limited state resources.