House Bill 1057 proposes a statewide commission focused on indigent defense, or legal representation for those without the ability to pay.
Across South Dakota, only three counties – Minnehaha, Pennington and Meade – have a dedicated public defender office. While the remaining 63 counties make indigent defense ends meet, they do it through an unregulated patchwork of contracted attorneys and court appointments.
As a result, state court administrator Greg Sattizahn said counties are left holding the bag. He testified Friday to the House State Affairs on behalf of state Supreme Court chief justice Steven Jensen.
“It’s an entire county expense," Sattizahn said. "By way of example, FY22 was our last complete year of data on this issue, the counties spent approximately $22 million providing indigent defense. The only source of reimbursement for that from the state is, for instance, if you received a speeding ticket there is a $7.50 surcharge that would go back to the counties.”
This bill would combat that by establishing a statewide commission solely dedicated to indigent defense appointed by the governor and Supreme Court. That commission would research how to best manage the need of indigent services against the reality of South Dakota’s legal pool.
“We’re one of only six states that has no statewide legal entity that coordinates legal defense," Sattizahn said. "How do we provide lawyers so they’re available? How do we make sure lawyers that are billing counties are charging appropriate amounts? Our defense Bar does not have that, so you’re really left on your own if you’re appointed to a case.”
Many indigent cases are complex, often violent crime cases that require specialized attorneys. As a result, the need for this service is seen throughout the Capitol. Katie Hruska, general counsel for Gov. Kristi Noem, spoke on her behalf.
“The creation of this commission and office will have an ongoing general fund impact and that is included in the governors recommended budget this year," Hruska said. "The Chief Justice and UJS worked closely with the executive after the task force met, and we think this was the best solution.”
Only one person testified against the bill – a Rapid City man - who described it as ‘sharia compliancy’ and a new tax on South Dakotans.
The proposal was advanced from committee unanimously and will next be heard by the House Appropriations Committee.