Court Opinion

ID: 9690046
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 18:52:16.890518+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:53.378117
License: Public Domain

SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, J.
(concurring). I am unwilling to say that the professional conduct at issue in this case — counsel's failure to discuss a no-merit report with the client — falls below a constitutionally acceptable threshold. I nonetheless find it troubling for counsel to rely on a written explanation — rather than a face-to-face explanation — of the right to a no-merit report.
*625The indigent criminal defendant in this case was informed of his constitutional right to a no-merit report, essential to a valid waiver of his right to appeal, only by mail in a packet of information sent to all clients of the State Public Defender. Under the State Public Defender's policy, the public defender would have directly advised the defendant of his right to a no-merit report only if he had expressed disagreement with her judgment that an appeal had no arguable merit. Nevertheless, the information mailed to the defendant explicitly states that an attorney who concludes that an appeal would be of no merit "will discuss available options with [the defendant]." Here, it is undisputed that no such discussion took place.*
Sending information about the appellate process to new clients by mail seems sensible to me. Despite the large case loads of public defenders and the limited funds available for counsel for indigent defendants, I believe the better practice would be for the attorney to supplement the mailing by discussing the right to a no-merit report with the client in person when the decision to file a no-merit report would be made. In such a *626face-to-face meeting counsel would have an opportunity to answer questions and correct any apparent misunderstandings.
In considering this case, it is difficult to ignore the underlying fact that it involves an appeal of a no-contest plea, which an experienced public defender determined to have no arguable merit. Under these circumstances, it is nevertheless important to remember why the United States Supreme Court required appointed counsel to file no-merit reports before asking an appellate court for leave to withdraw. Chiefly, the Court aimed to ensure that lawyers appointed to represent indigent criminal defendants would not shirk their duties and withdraw from representation without careful consideration of each case. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
There is no indication in the case at bar that the attorney in any way avoided her responsibilities or exercised poor judgment. Still, we must keep in mind that "[t]he Anders requirement assures that indigent defendants have the benefit of what wealthy defendants are able to acquire by purchase — a diligent and thorough review of the record and an identification of any arguable issues revealed by that review." McCoy v. Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, 486 U.S. 429, 439 (1988).
For the reasons set forth, I write separately.
I am authorized to state the Justice JANINE P. Geske joins this opinion.

This section of the State Public Defender's "Information for Clients" reads as follows:
No-merit reports. If a lawyer is of the opinion, after full review of the case and consultation with you, that any further proceedings on your behalf would be frivolous and without arguable merit, and you do not choose to relieve your lawyer of further representation, the lawyer will file a "no-merit report" as prescribed under sec. 809.32. Such reports are filed in very few of the office's cases. However, many cases are closed without any formal postconviction proceedings. If your lawyer can find no meritorious ground to attack your conviction or sentence, he or she will discuss the available options with you.
Could this paragraph be rewritten to make it more easily understood by lay people?