Roxbury District Court Probation Department's Indigency Determination Process for State-Sponsored Legal Services

This is a Massachusetts State Auditor report about how the Roxbury Division of the Boston Municipal Court Probation Department decided whether defendants were poor enough to receive state-paid legal representation.

“The objective of our work at each district court was limited to determining the extent to which probation staff in these courts were complying with their mandated responsibility established by Chapter 211D to ensure that a defendant claiming to be indigent meets the definition of indigence.”

The State Auditor was reviewing public counsel services statewide and included Roxbury as one of 27 district courts selected to see whether probation departments were properly checking indigency claims.

“As part of our audit of the CPCS, we selected a representative sample of 27 of the Commonwealth’s 70 district courts to review.”

State-paid lawyers are meant for defendants who legally qualify as indigent, so the court needs reliable checks and records to protect public money and ensure the system is fair.

“Chapter 211D charges the CPCS with the responsibility of providing legal counsel services to indigent persons entitled to representation by law.”

For taxpayers, the issue is whether public funds for court-appointed lawyers were spent only on people who qualified; auditors said there was not enough assurance that this happened for the 5,622 Roxbury defendants in fiscal year 2010.

“As a result of these conditions, there is inadequate assurance that the funding provided to the CPCS to retain public counsel for the 5,622 individuals deemed indigent by the RDC in fiscal year 2010 was appropriately spent.”

The auditor recommended that the Roxbury Probation Department immediately follow the law, create written procedures, and set up internal controls, including controls for keeping records.

“In order to address our concerns relative to this matter, we recommend that the RDC Probation Department take measures to immediately comply with all the requirements of Chapter 211D of the General Laws.”

The finding was significant because all 10 sampled files were missing some required documents, including every affidavit of indigency and every 60-day and six-month reassessment report.

“None of the 10 files contained completed Affidavit of Indigency Forms.”

“Indigent” means someone who meets legal standards showing they cannot afford counsel, such as receiving certain public benefits, having very low income, being in certain facilities, or being in custody without available funds.

“Rule 3:10, Section 1, of the Supreme Judicial Court defines an indigent person as an individual who is:”