Thurston County faces new public defender caseload limits amid tight budget
Thurston County will likely need to spend millions of dollars to meet new public defender caseload limits approved by the Washington Supreme Court.
Starting next year, attorneys providing full-time criminal defense services for poor defendants will be expected to take on a maximum of 47 felony case or 120 misdemeanor case a year, according to a June 9, four-page unanimous court order.
“The crisis in the provision of indigent criminal defense services throughout our state requires action now,” Chief Justice Debra Stephens wrote in the order.
The new standards are less than a third of the current thresholds of 150 felonies or 400 misdemeanors. Slashing caseloads is expected to provide relief for overworked public defenders who are struggling to provide suitable and equitable counsel to their clients.
Though the new standards take effect Jan. 1, 2026, the court has instructed counties to meet the new rules “as soon as reasonably possible” with at least a 10% reduction each year. Full compliance must occur by 2036. That gives counties time to consider how to follow the new standards, but the result may still prove costly.
Thurston County currently spends about $9 million per year on Public Defense from its general fund, according to the county budget.
When reached for comment, Commissioner and Board Chair Tye Menser said county staff are still evaluating the cost of meeting the new standards but he estimated it may cost the county an additional $1 million every year over the next decade at an “absolute minimum.”
He said the board expects to start discussing how to implement the new standards with relevant stakeholders later this summer. Though the budgetary impact is the big issue for the county, Menser said he fully supports the new caseload standards as a matter of policy.
“I spent 17 years as a full-time or part-time public defender,” Menser said. “The new standards are warranted. The quality of representation – and therefore the freedoms and basic constitutional rights of our residents – are compromised when lawyers do not have adequate time to defend their clients who have been accused by the government of a crime.”
The Supreme Court announced the standards during a difficult budget year for the county. Menser said the county is facing a structural gap in the county budget that’s roughly on the same scale that the state just faced, yet the county does not have the same financial tools to raise revenue as the state.
“The state couldn’t find a way to close their budget gap with cuts alone, but we as a county are expected to,” Menser said. “The new resources needed for public defense are on top of that significant budget gap we have to address this fall. This would be challenging in any year, but it will be extraordinarily challenging this year.”
How will this affect Thurston County Public Defense?
The new standards were a long-time coming. Patrick O’Connor, Thurston County’s Public Defense Director, said the state Supreme Court’s decision earlier this summer helped ease the sense situation.
“I was relieved to have direction,” O’Connor said. “Frankly, I was relieved for our overburdened and overworked public defenders here in Thurston County. The order leaves a lot of room. Our defenders were more optimistic that a timeline would be shorter, but the court left that up to the counties with this order.”
Thurston County could decide to fully comply with the new standards sooner than the 10—year deadline. However, Menser said the county will likely have to use the full grace period unless the state provides more assistance.
For now, O’Connor said his office is assessing the practical implications of complying with the order in preparation for board briefings later this summer.
The county currently employs about 25 trial attorneys and has no vacancies, O’Connor said. All of those attorneys are working close to current maximum number of cases allowable under the current standards, which is 150 felonies cases or 400 misdemeanor cases, he said.
The end result is a lot of overtime and burnout for attorneys, he said.
“That’s what really has driven unbelievably talented, dedicated defenders out of the profession,” O’Connor said. “It’s just not sustainable.”
The situation also impacts clients. Under the current standards, O’Connor said an attorney assigned to represent a person who’s accused of an adult felony is awarded 12.5 hours to work on that case.
Meanwhile, an attorney who represents a person accused of a misdemeanor is given just 4.5 hours to work on that case. An attorney assigned to a juvenile case gets just 7.5 hours.
“At the end of the day, the court is adjusting the caseloads, not just for the public defenders, but to ensure that the clients have an attorney that has a manageable case load so they can dedicate the time necessary to defending that case,” O’Connor said.
There’s some leeway to weigh cases differently, O’Connor said, so his office awards an attorney assigned to a homicide case 36 hours. That’s still not enough.
“We weigh our most serious, serious cases, currently, at a fraction of what the work really is,” O’Connor said. “That’s something that the new standards really addressed.”
A person accused of a crime has a right to an attorney. Failing to provide one can create untenable case backlogs and even lead to the release of people accused of crimes.
“We haven’t reached that point, thankfully” O’Connor said. “That’s my biggest fear.”
Counties demand more support from the state
Derek Young, Executive Director of the Washington State Association of Counties, commented on the order in a July 7 news release. He said he appreciated the court acknowledging the crisis in the state’s public defense system but he called their solution an “impossible burden” for counties.
“Washington is unique among states, relying almost entirely on locally generated revenue to fund the justice system and the constitutionally guaranteed right to counsel,” Young said. “This order, without significant state support, is an unfunded mandate that will devastate county finances and jeopardize the safety of our communities.”
To address the issue, WSAC is calling on state lawmakers to fully fund the public defense system as well as implement a public legal workforce development and retention strategy.
“Even if fully funded, there aren’t enough legal professionals entering public service to meet these caseload standards,” the release says. “We need a sustainable pipeline of talent to meet the critical need in all roles in public law, including prosecutors, public defenders, and legal support staff.”
Lastly, WSAC is asking state lawmakers to partner with local governments to absorb specialty cases, such as juvenile and competency cases, by using a statewide and regionalized staffing system.
WSAC and several counties are also litigating the issue. On July 22, an appeals court ruled that Washington counties can sue the state for more public defense funding.
Under the current system, counties must pay almost all the cost of providing criminal defense services to indigent clients.
WSAC argue counties cannot raise enough money at the local level to meet this cost and provide other essential services because the state limits how much they can tax people.
The plaintiffs contend the system is unconstitutional because it creates disparities in the quality of legal representation for indigent defendants. The end result, the lawsuit argues, violates the fundamental rights to counsel and equal protection guaranteed by the state and federal constitutions.
Following the ruling, Young called the decision a critical step forward in addressing this “long-standing and serious issue” in the state’s criminal justice system.
“For decades, counties have borne the disproportionate financial burden of providing constitutionally mandated public defense, often stretching resources to their breaking point,” Young said. “This ruling affirms our right to seek a just and sustainable solution that ensures fair access to legal representation for all, regardless of where they live or their ability to pay.”
In addition to WSAC, Lincoln, Pacific and Yakima counties are party to the lawsuit. Thurston County is not named in the lawsuit, however Menser said the county is working with WSAC on this issue.
“I am certain that Thurston County, through WSAC, will continue to advocate for more state support for public defense,” Menser said. “Since this affects every county in the state, not just Thurston, I am hopeful we will be successful at some point.”
This story was originally published August 10, 2025 at 5:00 AM.
