You know you're in trouble when not a single judge or justice agrees with you.
A defendant had his death sentence overturned in 2005. In 2006, new "conflict" attorneys were found by a State agency, appointed by the judge and a whole new trial took place. Then, after the trial was over, the agency refused to pay the attorneys, claiming the $68,946.61 should be paid by the county. The judge disagreed, ordered the agency to pay, and - after the agency refused - held it in contempt.
Now the agency got its shot to convince the Supreme Court of Georgia. The agency argued that it shouldn't have to pay because the the charge came into being prior to the existence of the statute requiring it to pay. Every single Justice joins in a ruling which, in polite legalese, calls that argument balderdash. "The attorneys were appointed after the statute was in place, you promised to pay them, and it's a brand new trial - so you cannot disclaim the debt by claiming the date of the original trial is the relevant date. Pay up, you skinflints!"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Popular entries
-
With the price of gas in the modern day, I've looked around at scooters/mopeds a little bit. An interesting thing out there is the 3 whe...
-
June 16, 2004 In this newsletter: HAWAII EXTENDS ACT 221 Hawaii has some very impressive and generous tax incentives. Considering all the pu...
-
The affluence of the United States and the various States has allowed us to spend a great deal of money on the criminal justice system. Now,...
-
An interesting part of Michigan v. Bryant is the hostility which bleeds through the decision to the decoupling of the hearsay exceptions fr...
-
There's been a bit of a buzz lately about laptop inspections by the Department of Homeland Security ( Crossing the border? Consider the ...
-
My latest posting on slaw.ca: Drawing the curtain on ISP cooperation with law enforcement – Slaw I've been a faithful follower of Crypto...
-
So, I'm reading through the Virginia Appellate blawgs and I find out that the Virginia Supreme Court has changed the Rules as they apply...
-
Every so often the Supreme Court of Virginia seems to adopt a theme across a couple of cases. An example of this was in 2007 when the Court ...
-
So, you have the right to bear arms and you have the right to defend yourself, but what if you arm yourself in anticipation of defending you...