AZ Supreme Court shuts down plan for students to take on criminal cases after 1 year of law school

After mounting criticism, the Arizona Supreme Court has pulled the plug on a proposal to allow people with just a year of law school to handle criminal cases.

The court gave its top administrator the green light to research the proposal earlier this month as the American Bar Association says Arizona has among the fewest lawyers per capita in the country.

"Because of that, any innovative ideas that people bring to us, we're willing to listen, keep an open mind, let's see the pros and cons and costs. This is one from Day One I had my doubts about under the Sixth Amendment, among other things," Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer said.

The court halted the proposal before a pilot project was drafted.

Justices had encouraged Dave Byers, director of the administrative office of the courts, to explore the option of a one-year program and gauge public sentiment, particularly within the legal community.

As it turned out, she said, there were "a lot of detractors.'' But the chief justice acknowledged that the reaction to creating the first-of-its-kind program in the country for licensing people with just one year of law school was not exactly a surprise.

But Timmer said there are other options being explored to fill the need.

One already is about to be put in place: a part-time, fully online program to be offered beginning in January at the Arizona State University College of Law. Timmer said that will allow students who live in rural communities and don't want to spend three years in Phoenix or Tucson to remain home and get the same Juris Doctor degree as if they were full-time students on campus, albeit in four years.

More to the point, she said these new graduates might be more willing to remain in their home communities and practice law there.

"There's huge interest in that,'' Timmer said.

What Byers was proposing -- and the court has now quashed -- was far more radical.

The underlying problem starts with fact that full-time law school takes three years -- and a lot of money. Byers estimated the cost, even at one of Arizona's two public law schools, at $177,000.

Byers said what often happens is those who graduate with a law degree choose to take jobs in urban areas where the salaries are higher and they can repay the loans they incurred.

By contrast, he said, a one-year program can be designed to give students all the courses they need to practice law, jettisoning other subjects that they don't need, like contract law. And the cost for just a year of tuition and fees -- with no living expenses -- would be about $31,200.

They would have to graduate with a B or better average and pass appropriate license exams. They would be granted a degree in Master of Legal Studies.

And they would first have to work under the supervision of an actual licensed attorney for some period -- his proposal now suggests nine months -- before they could practice on their own.

But at that point the holders of the special MLS designation would be free to take on any clients in criminal cases anywhere in Arizona they want. And they'd be able to handle everything short of a crime where the death penalty could be imposed.

Dean Brault, director of public defense services for Pima County, called it "absurd'' that someone with just two semesters of legal education would be able to practice law in cases where people could end up behind bars for the rest of their lives.

And Pima County Attorney Laura Conover questioned why the state would allow someone with just one year of formal legal training to handle criminal cases, where someone's liberty is at issue, yet require a full three-year degree to help someone prepare a will.

Timmer said she and her colleagues still are willing to consider the idea at some future -- and unspecified -- time.

"Never say 'never,' '' she said.

"If it's developed with a different angle, could have more safeguards at some point, maybe,'' the chief justice said. "But now, as presented, no.''

Still, Timmer said the problem of getting lawyers into rural areas continues -- and may defy easy solutions.

"Their problem is they're looking at how much they have to be paying people,'' she said.

"Arizona isn't a rich state. Nobody has extra money to pay,'' Timmer continued. "So that's always an issue with trying to lure people out to the rural areas when they can get paid more in the cities.''

One option might be to make it easier for attorneys in adjacent states, lawyers who already are physically close to rural Arizona areas, to practice in Arizona.

They would still have to be licensed in both states. But Timmer said the court could decide that they don't have to overcome additional hurdles, like having to complete duplicate continuing education requirements.

Other models for attracting people to rural areas, however, are not viable options.

For example, Arizona offers one year of tuition at a state college of education for every year a graduate teaches in rural or underserved areas. But that took an act of the Legislature -- as well as state funding -- something that the Supreme Court can't do by itself.