My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/21/1986
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1986
>
10/21/1986
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:53:20 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 1:10:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
10/21/1986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
78
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
BOOK c <br />ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by <br />Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) <br />scheduled a public hearing for November 18, 1986 <br />to establish a street lighting district for Ixora <br />Park and Eastview Gardens Subdivision. <br />STATE OF FLORIDA VS. JIM ERIC CHANDLER <br />The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/15/86: <br />TO: The Board of County Commissioners <br />DATE: October 15, 1986 <br />SUBJECT: ate of Florida vs. Jim Eric Chandler <br />FROM:( rit <br />P.Wilson <br />ant County Attorney <br />This office has recently received a bill from an attorney, <br />Robert Udell, who handled the defense of the <br />above -referenced case in the recent sentencing hearing which <br />was held in St. Lucie County. This was a first-degree <br />murder case which the Public Defender originally handled but <br />approximately one year 'ago was allowed to withdraw from due <br />to excessive case load. The attorney's bill in the amount <br />of $14,666.00 is wet I in excess of the statutory fee I imit <br />established by statute for such cases, which is $3,500.00. <br />Mr. Ude IIIs proposed fee is based upon a recent Florida <br />Supreme Court decision, Makemson vs. Martin County, in which <br />the statutory fee limit was declared unworkable in certain <br />"extraordinary circumstances". <br />Mr. Udell claims that .the Chandler case is an example of <br />those extraordinary circumstances cited in the Court's <br />opinion and has submitted numerous affidavits from private <br />attorneys in support of his proposed fee. This matter is <br />set for hearing for the Court on November 4, 1986. Mr. <br />Udell has indicated that he is willing to accept a lesser <br />figure than the amount requested to avoid the additional <br />exppse and time which may be necessary to hold the hearing <br />and'to litigate any appeals from the Court's decision. <br />The Board is faced with three alternatives in this matter: <br />1. To accept and pay the original amount requested by Mr. <br />Udell. <br />2. To attempt to renegotiate'a lesser amount with Mr. <br />Udell. <br />3. To proceed to a hearing on this matter and to pursue any <br />subsequent appeals, whether filed by Mr. Udell or by the <br />County. <br />a I wi 1 I be prepared to answer any questions you may have on <br />this matter at your regularly scheduled meeting of October <br />21, 1986. <br />70 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.