Of the State, against the State: Public Defenders, Street-Level Bureaucracy, and Discretion in Criminal Court

Abstract

Research shows that street-level bureaucrats rely on notions of deservingness to manage their caseloads. Accounts traditionally identify how workers use mainstream cues to categorize clients, but a growing literature calls for situated accounts of discretion. This study draws on fieldwork with public defenders to describe how institutional position and professional knowledge condition discretion. I analyze how the dynamics of representation inform defenders’ understandings of and advocacy for clients with varying criminal-legal backgrounds and needs. In this case study, defenders’ perceived strategic options penetrate their estimations of clients’ deservingness and drive their advocacy. Tailored representation elevates the needs of individuals without records and those with unremitting criminal-legal contact, helping attorneys manage their caseloads and advance their aspirations, but it produces uneven defense. I develop a role concept, “structural antagonist,” to signify and describe a uniquely situated street-level bureaucrat whose mandate includes both serving and straining the institution.