This year’s problem addresses the following issues:
I. Whether § 66.04 of the Apalsa Revised Statutes (“ARS”) precluding a public defender from withdrawing on the basis of excessive workload or lack of resource violates the right to effective assistance of counsel guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
A. Whether ARS § 66.04 is facially unconstitutional.
B. Whether ARS § 66.04 is unconstitutional as applied in this case.
II. Whether the sanctions imposed on Appellant by the Professional Ethics Board of the State Bar of Apalsa violated her rights under the Constitution of the United States.
A. Whether the sanctions imposed for refusing to comply with a court order to represent a criminal defendant violate the Fifth Amendment right to due process.
B. Whether the sanctions imposed for Appellant’s public statement regarding her refusal to comply with a court order to represent a criminal defendant violate the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of expression.