Laserfiche WebLink
13.A.5. OPPOSITION TO PROPOSED RULE OF JUDICIAL <br />ADMINISTRATION CURRENTLY BEING CONSIDERED BY THE <br />FLORIDA SUPREME COURT (NO. 90.635) — CAPITAL (DEATH <br />PENALTY) CASES, MINIMUM STANDARD G <br />The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 3, 1997 and a letter of August 22, 1997: <br />REVe`Njeo <br />FLOin <br />ASSOCfa .ds <br />11 C064'.fol e <br />P.O. Box 549 i Tallahause, Florida 32302 <br />PhAUA► 850/224-3148 FAX 8101222.3839 <br />ASS <br />gOPROss ONLY <br />Grim If E M O R A N 0 U M.— via facsimile Pagel of 10 <br />TO: All County Commission Chairs <br />FROM: Vivian Zaricki, Executive Director <br />SUBJECT: Florida Supreme Court Proposod Rule - Capital (Depth Penalty) Cases <br />DATE: October 3, 1997 <br />beim+ eenaidered by the Florida Suprame Qud (No_ 90.63U This rule will require <br />all persons not being represented by the public defender in capital cases to be <br />represented by Imm attorneys. This will result In counties paying for two attorneys in <br />death penalty cases where counsel Is appointed by the court. <br />Attached is a sample resolution opposing the amendment before the Court. The <br />amendment would prove extremely costly to county government by increasing <br />appointed counsel costs. The creation of such a requirement also circumvents the <br />Legislature's authority to make substantive law. <br />For your information I have also included the comments filed by Palm Beach County, <br />Dade County, and Representative Victor Crist, Chairman of the Florida House of <br />Representatives' Justice Council. <br />If you have any questions, please call me or John Ricco of FAC staH_q Tl '4-R <br />110 <br />Fir►a;�+:s <br />OMB <br />�Em,,,le�rs�. S.rv. <br />WY1AA17ARN'R) /A1iNMANNINC NOWMA40V 0WARObO/XON 1NCro-AU9liPl�;L �1 <br />FOCulivi VINLOE R PRFSIOFNT PRFSIDENr• h FC7 IST vu:F PRFSJOfNT IND via <br />J►fSIUEN? <br />!FF LEON CWMIN AMMON ••f1Gi �iiiiRRiitDi d4 <br />M1m As" <br />OCTOBER 7, 1997 <br />117 H,:� 102 ',AGi:809 <br />