A Washington state appeals court has ruled that a coalition of counties has standing to sue the state to force it to provide adequate funding for indigent defense services, saying the coalition had shown that it had been harmed by the current funding system.

In a 27-page ruling issued Tuesday, a three-judge panel of the Washington Court of Appeals reversed a trial court ruling that had dismissed the lawsuit and remanded the case, holding that the counties had met the legal requirements on standing for the litigation to move forward.

One of the thresholds met by the counties involved showing that their ability to represent that poor defendants had been limited by the state's lack of contribution to local public defender offices. Another one involved the public interest surrounding the issue as a whole.

"The public importance of adequate funding for indigent criminal defense is self-evident, notwithstanding the state's arguments to the contrary," the panel wrote. "These issues, thus far, have escaped review — even if other plaintiffs could effectively bring a similar systemic challenge to the state's funding scheme for indigent defense, none has."

Washington state pays for only a fraction — about 7% — of the total budget for indigent defense services, a share that has been recently raised from about 3%. The rest of funding comes from the counties.

The Washington State Association of Counties, or WSCA, joined by Pacific, Lincoln and Yakima counties, sued Washington in September 2023 claiming that the funding system for indigent defense services is unconstitutional.

The complaint sought a permanent injunction from the court to compel the state to provide adequate funding, alleging that the current system makes it impossible for public defenders to effectively represent poor defendants.

The state shot back to try to end the lawsuit, arguing that the counties had no standing because they invoked rights held by individual defendants, not the counties themselves, and because an injunction would violate separation of powers principles. The trial court sided with the state, but the state Court of Appeals rejected those arguments.

"The counties' complaint does not allege theoretical harm from the indigent defense funding system; rather, it alleges that the system's financial constraints have directly harmed its ability to meet its constitutional duty to provide indigent defense," the panel wrote.

Derek Young, the executive director of WSAC, hailed the appellate court's decision as an important milestone in a controversy that has played out both in the Legislature and in court for over a decade, without tangible results.

"This decision is a critical step forward in addressing a long-standing and serious issue within our criminal justice system," he told Law360. "For decades, counties have borne the disproportionate financial burden of providing constitutionally mandated public defense, often stretching resources to their breaking point. 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."

Since the lawsuit was filed in 2023, Washington has increased its share of funding for indigent defense. While that was a welcome development, new directives on attorney caseload issued by the state Supreme Court last month are threatening to wipe out those gains, Young said.

The state high court mandated a dramatic reduction — two-thirds — of the maximum allowed caseloads public defenders can take, which Young said will effectively force public defenders to hire more attorneys, increasing costs threefold, according to WSAC.

The current lawsuit filed by the counties offers a path to secure more reliable funding where other solutions, including legislative proposals, have failed.

"Without substantial investment from the state, we're going to face a public safety crisis in Washington," Lincoln County Commissioner and WSAC President Rob Coffman said in a joint statement following the ruling. "The governor and Legislature should get straight to work on a full funding solution to protect our residents and their rights."

Young called Washington an "extreme outlier" in the context of funding indigent defense. In recent years, neighboring states Idaho and Oregon have enacted laws shifting the burden of funding public defenders onto state government.

"When all responsibilities devolve to the local level, you're setting up the Sixth Amendment rights to be dependent on the wealth of the county," he said. "That creates wide disparities around the state."

The appellate court panel clarified in its ruling that it was not addressing the merits of the complaint or offering opinions on the current system of funding indigent criminal defense in the state.

Tuesday's ruling sends the case back to the Superior Court in Thurston County, Washington, which will now look at the merits of the case.

The plaintiffs are represented by Paul J. Lawrence, Ian D. Rogers and Christopher M. Sanders of Pacifica Law Group LLP.

Counsel information for Washington state was not immediately available.

The case is Washington State Association of Counties et al. v. State of Washington, case number 60179-6-II, in the Court of Appeals of the State of Washington, Division II.

--Editing by Rich Mills.