Opinion ID: 1931975
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Remand in this Case

Text: In accordance with the remand from this Court, the Superior Court held a hearing on February 26, 1988. An Assistant Public Defender was called to testify by the State. The Assistant Public Defender was asked if he was familiar with the standards that the Office of the Public Defender used to determine whether or not a person was financially eligible for its services. The Assistant Public Defender responded that he was not involved in making eligibility determinations. However, based upon his discussions with other persons in his office, he believed Potter would not be eligible for representation by the Public Defender's Office. The notes of the person who interviewed Potter on August 8, 1986, were introduced by the State as an exhibit at the February 26, 1988 hearing. Potter also testified at this hearing. Potter stated that he had overestimated his monthly income when he estimated it to be $900 in 1986. He testified that his monthly income in 1986 was $300 to $500 per month. A payroll receipt was introduced in partial support of Potter's testimony. Following the February 26, 1988 hearing, the Superior Court concluded: Although the Court has the burden of determining the defendant's indigency at the time of trial and after arraignment, the same standards should be applied by the Court as by the Public Defender's Office to determine whether or not a person qualifies for court-appointed legal assistance. The Court finds, as a result of reviewing the record and the evidentiary hearing on February 26, 1988, that the defendant's net income was $900 a month and that the defendant has failed to establish that he was entitled to court-appointed counsel in August, 1986, defendant having the burden.