The Facts

A San Francisco Superior Court judge found Public Defender Mano Raju in contempt on March 10, 2026 for continuing to refuse some new appointments despite a prior court order, according to David Hernandez at the San Francisco Chronicle. Raju says his office began limiting intake in May 2025 due to staffing shortages and unmanageable caseloads, and that he plans to keep refusing some cases while he appeals, as KQED reported.

The Chronicle reports the judge may consider monetary sanctions at a later date. The court’s legal representation dashboard shows hundreds of appointments have been declined in recent months.

The Context

GrowSF flagged this standoff earlier, when a judge first threatened contempt over the same refusal policy.

California’s State Public Defender-backed workload study argues that without enforceable caseload limits and adequate investigators/support staff, defenders can’t reliably meet constitutional duties.

When the Public Defender can’t take a case, San Francisco often relies on court-appointed private counsel through the Bar Association’s Indigent Defense Administration, which was designed for conflicts—not as a permanent overflow valve.

The GrowSF Take

We sympathize with the Public Defender’s Office: if caseloads are truly unmanageable, that’s a problem the city needs to solve.

But defendants have a constitutional right to counsel, and refusing appointments in defiance of a court order can’t be the way SF runs its courts.