A Crucial Moment in Defense: An RCT of Counsel at First Appearance

Last registered on January 30, 2025

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
A Crucial Moment in Defense: An RCT of Counsel at First Appearance
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0015291
Initial registration date
January 28, 2025

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
January 30, 2025, 10:55 AM EST

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
Texas A&M University

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
Texas A&M University
PI Affiliation
Harvard Law School
PI Affiliation
Harvard Law School

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2020-07-06
End date
2021-09-21
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Upon arrest and booking, a defendant is presented in front of a judge in a hearing referred to as first appearance also known as magistration. At first appearance, magistrate judges decide whether a person will be released while awaiting trial or held in jail. Currently, there are no counsel present at magistration in almost all counties around the state of Texas. Out of 254 counties, only 5 (Bexar, Cameron, Fort Bend, Harris, and Potter Counties) offer counsel at first appearance. Nationally, and as of 2009, only fourteen states guarantee legal representation at first appearance. There has never been a systematic evaluation of the effects of counsel at first appearance on different outcomes. This study examines the causal impact of a defense counsel on primary outcomes including bail type, bail amount, release decisions, release conditions, and secondary outcomes such as recidivism, failure to appear, and disposition.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Danser, Renee et al. 2025. "A Crucial Moment in Defense: An RCT of Counsel at First Appearance." AEA RCT Registry. January 30. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.15291-1.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Upon arrest and booking, a defendant is presented in front of a judge in a hearing referred to as first appearance also known as magistration. At first appearance, magistrate judges decide whether a person will be released while awaiting trial or held in jail. Currently, there are no counsel present at magistration in almost all counties around the state of Texas. Out of 254 counties, only 5 (Bexar, Cameron, Fort Bend, Harris, and Potter Counties) offer counsel at first appearance. Nationally, and as of 2009, only fourteen states guarantee legal representation at first appearance. There has never been a systematic evaluation of the effects of counsel at first appearance on different outcomes. This study examines the causal impact of a defense counsel on primary outcomes including bail type, bail amount, release decisions, release conditions, and secondary outcomes such as recidivism, failure to appear, and disposition.
Intervention (Hidden)
Intervention Start Date
2020-07-06
Intervention End Date
2021-09-21

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Bail type, bail amount, release conditions, days in jail
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Recidivism, failure to appear, disposition, sentencing, cost
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
This study takes advantage of the magistration process occurring once a day in two counties to randomize days on which defense counsel is present at magistration. The research team created a randomization schedule for a full year plus a few pilot days. In Hays County, the RCT study started on July 6, 2020, and ended on July 11, 2021. In Potter County, the RCT study started on September 16, 2020, and ended on September 21, 2021. The randomization schedule is balanced for day of the week and month to account for seasonality in criminal activity and maintaining a 50% randomization rate. The schedule was set up at the day level allowing for attorneys to be present at magistration on the treatment days for the full duration of all hearings. Attorneys met with all defendants who are scheduled for magistration for about 10 minutes each before the hearing started. Attorneys advocated on behalf of each defendant in front of the judge.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Randomization was done using the randomize command in Stata.
Randomization Unit
Days
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
About 365 days for each county.
Sample size: planned number of observations
About 5000 individuals in Hays County and 3000 individuals in Potter County.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
About 2500 individuals in the control and 2500 in the treatment in Hays County
About 1500 individuals in the control and 1500 in the treatment in Potter County
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials