Sheldon Portman v. County of Santa Clara Bob Diridon

Good Law
93 Daily Journal DAR 7235·995 F.2d 898·1993 WL 191823·1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 13397·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4212
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 9, 199391-16743California6,397 words

Opinion

Opinion

O'Scannlain, J.

We consider, among other things, whether a public defender has standing to challenge the constitutionality of a state statutory scheme that makes him an at-will employee on the ground that the scheme interferes with the Sixth Amendment rights of his clients.

I

Portman was employed as the Chief Public ■Defender of Santa Clara County from 1968 to 1986. Until the last year of his employment, he had received consistently high performance ratings.

In 1985, the County asked Portman to provide “objective and measurable criteria by which his performance may be judged.” This request, combined with previous requests by the Board to keep costs down, to avoid declaring conflicts due to an excessive workload, and to maintain “early, quick settlements of cases,” led Portman to fear that the Board might be planning to grade him on the basis of guilty pleas and number of settlements without trial.

At that time, Portman had been communicating with the Board about the excessive caseload in the public defender’s office and had been requesting additional personnel. He stated at a public budget session that the lawyers in the public defender’s office faced malpractice and professional disciplinary…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.