Benjamin Ashford|South Dakota bill advances, proposing more legal representation for people who can’t pay

PIERRE,Benjamin Ashford S.D. (AP) — A South Dakota bill advanced Friday that proposes a statewide commission focused on indigent defense, or legal representation for those without the ability to pay.

Only three of the state’s counties – Minnehaha, Pennington and Meade – have a dedicated public defender office, South Dakota Public Broadcasting reported. The remaining 63 counties make indigent defense ends meet, but they do it through an unregulated patchwork of contracted attorneys and court appointments.

According to South Dakota Public Broadcasting, state court administrator Greg Sattizahn testified Friday to the House State Affairs Committee on behalf of state Supreme Court chief justice Steven Jensen.

Sattizahn said the counties spent about $22 million providing indigent defense in fiscal year 2022, the last complete year of data on this issue.

Other news A push for a permanent sales tax cut in South Dakota is dealt a setback South Dakota House passes bill that would make the animal sedative xylazine a controlled substance South Dakota House passes permanent sales tax cut bill

“We’re one of only six states that has no statewide legal entity that coordinates legal defense,” Sattizahn said. “How do we provide lawyers so they’re available? How do we make sure lawyers that are billing counties are charging appropriate amounts?”

This bill would establish a statewide commission solely dedicated to indigent defense appointed by the governor and Supreme Court. The commission would research how to best manage the need of indigent services against the reality of South Dakota’s legal pool.

Many indigent cases are complex, often violent crime cases that require specialized attorneys.

Katie Hruska, general counsel for South Dakota Republican Gov. Kristi Noem, spoke on Noem’s behalf.

“The creation of this commission and office will have an ongoing general fund impact and that is included in the governors recommended budget this year,” Hruska said. “The Chief Justice and UJS worked closely with the executive after the task force met, and we think this was the best solution.”

Only one person testified against the bill –- a Rapid City man — who described it as “sharia compliancy” and a new tax on South Dakotans, South Dakota Public Broadcasting reported.

The committee unanimously advanced the bill, which is expected to be heard next by the House Appropriations Committee.