STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE SUPREME COURT IN RE

STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE SUPREME COURT IN RE: WAYNE COUNTY CRIMINAL DEFENSE BAR ASSGcZL$TION, and THE C ~ ~ I N D E F E ~ S E A L ATTORNEYS OF MICHIGAN. Plaintiffs, ) ) Case No. 1 1 COMPLAINT FOR WRIT OF SUPERINTENDING CONTROL A civil action between these parties or other parties arising out of similar transactions or occurrences alleged in this complaint has been previously filed in this Court, where it was given docket nos. 68204, 70647, and 86099. These actions are no longer pending Brian D. Sieve Michael B. Slade Kirkland & Ellis 200 East Randolph Drive Chicago, IL 60601 (3 12-861-2000) Attorneys for Plaintiffs Bellanca, Beattie, and DeLisle P.C. 20480 Vernier Road Harper Woods, MI 48225 (313-882-1 100) STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE SUPREME COURT IN RE: WAYNE COUNTY CRIMINAL DEFENSE BAR ASSOCIATION, and THE CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS OF MICHIGAN. Plaintiffs, 1 ) ) ) Case No. ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR WRIT OF SUPERINTENDING CONTROL A civil action between these parties or other parties arising out of similar transactions or occurrences alleged in this complaint has been previously filed in this Court, where it was given docket nos. 68204,70647, and 86099. These actions are no longer pending Brian D. Sieve Michael B. Slade Kirkland & Ellis 200 East Randolph Drive Chicago, IL 60601 (3 12-861-2000) Attorneys for Plaintiffs Bellanca, Beattie, and DeLisle P.C. 20480 Vernier Road Harper Woods, MI 48225 (313-882-1 100) Plaintiffs, through their attorneys KIRKLAND & ELLIS and BELLANCA, BEATTIE & DE LISLE, P.C., bring this original action before the Supreme Court, seeking a Writ of Superintending Control. In support of that request, Plaintiffs assert as follows: I. Nature of the Action 1. This is an action pursuant to MCR 3.302 and 7.304, seeking a writ of superintending control to the Chief Judges of the Wayne County Circuit Court ordering them to enact a fee schedule that provides increased legal fees for counsel appointed to represent indigent criminal defendants. Specifically, Plaintiffs request that this Court order the Chief Judges to (a) vacate the fee schedule currently in place in Wayne County; (b) vacate the June 25,2001 Administrative Order decreasing all fees paid by 10%; (c) implement a fee schedule either: (1) setting compensation for attorneys appointed to defend indigents at an hourly rate of $90; (2) consisting of the event-based "Jobes Plan," a fee schedule approved by the special master appointed by this Court in 1993, as adjusted for inflation; or (3) consisting of the more detailed event-based schedule proposed by the WCCBDA, which one Chief Judge has admitted constitutes reasonable compensation for services performed; (d) mandate that the Chief Judge include a provision in each fee schedule for future increases to account for inflation; and (e) mandate that appointed counsel be paid within a reasonable time, not more than thirty days, of rendering their services. 2. Under MCL 775.16, compensation for counsel appointed to represent indigent criminal defendants must be "reasonable compensation for the services performed." Enforcing this statutory requirement in the past, this Court has mandated that counsel for indigent criminal defendants be paid reasonable fees. In violation of both the Michigan legislature and this Court's ruling in In the Matter of the Recorder's Court Bar Ass 'n, 443 Mich. 110 (1993), the Chief Judges of Wayne County Circuit Court issued Administrative Order 1998- 03 (see Exhibit I), which provides fees that are unreasonably low by any definition. In further violation of Michigan law, on June 25, 2001 the Chief Judges instituted a mandatory 10% across-the-board reduction for all fees paid. (See Exhibit 2) The Chief Judges7 June 25, 2001 Order exacerbated an already unbearable situation for attorneys and clients alike. Through their conduct, the Chief Judges have abdicated the clear legal duty placed upon them by MCL 775.16. 1. 1 Parties 3. The Wayne County Criminal Defense Bar Association ("WCCDBA"), formerly known as the Recorder's Court Bar Association ("RCBA"), is a non-profit, voluntary association of lawyers who accept assignments in the criminal courts of Wayne County. Many members of WCCDBA accept appointments under the fee schedule enacted by the Chief Judge. These WCCDBA members are personally affected by the fee schedule. 4. The Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan ("CDAM") is a non-profit Michigan corporation, whose members or employees are appointed to represent indigent defendants in criminal actions pending before the Wayne County Circuit Court. Many members of CDAM accept appointments under the fee schedule enacted by the Chief Judge. These CDAM members are personally affected by the fee schedules. 5. The Defendants in this action are the Chief Judges of Wayne County Circuit Court, who have the authority and the duty under Michigan law to set the fees for attorneys appointed to represent indigents in felony cases. Under Michigan state law, Wayne County has a duty to pay whatever fees the Chief Judges authorize as "reasonable compensation for services performed." 111. Jurisdiction 6. Pursuant to MCR 3.302 and 7.304, this Court has original jurisdiction over a complaint seeking a writ of superintending control over lower courts. Under those provisions, this Court has heard previous challenges to the reasonableness of a Chief Judge's Order establishing attorney fees for appointed counsel in indigent felony cases. See, e.g., In the Matter o the Recorder's Court Bar Ass 'n, 443 Mich. 110 (1993). f 7. Under MCR 3.302, this Court has the power to issue writs of superintending control over lower courts if those courts are violating clear legal duties, and if Plaintiffs have no adequate legal remedies other than the writ sought. 8. Through enforcement of Administrative Order 1998-03 (Ex. I), which governs "Assigned Counsel Fees For Criminal Division Cases," and through their June 25, 2001 declaration of an across-the-board 10% fee reduction, the Chief Judges have violated the clear legal duty imposed upon them by MCL 775.16. 9. Plaintiffs have no adequate legal remedy to challenge the administrative actions of the Chief Judges other than a complaint seeking a writ of superintending control. IV. Background Facts A. The History Of Litigation Over Statutorily Mandated "Reasonable" Fees In Wayne County. 10. Michigan law requiring the payment of fees to appointed criminal defense counsel predates Gideon v. Wainright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963). Since 1893, Michigan statutes have specifically mandated that payments to appointed counsel be "reasonable compensation for the services performed." MCL 775.16 11. In or about 1967, the Wayne County Circuit Court instituted a schedule of fees to be paid to appointed criminal defense counsel, attached as Exhibit 3. The Recorder's Court instituted a schedule in 1970, attached as Exhibit 4. The Wayne County schedule was amended in 1971, and the amended schedule is attached as Exhibit 5. 12. From 1967 through 1981, counsel appointed to represent indigent criminal defendants brought before the Wayne County Circuit Court and the Recorder's Court for the City of Detroit were paid in accordance with Exhibits 3, 4, and 5. During that fourteen pear period, while payments to appointed criminal defense counsel remained the same, inflation increased the cost of living (and doing business) by a factor of three. 13. In 1981, some of the Plaintiffs in this action, along with other plaintiffs, brought a complaint for superintending control against the Chief Judges of the Wayne County Circuit Court and the Recorder's Court, seeking an order imposing reasonable fees and setting aside the 1967 fee schedules. As a result of that complaint, the Chief Judges revised the schedules and raised the fees consistent with the increase in the cost of living in Detroit. That revision resulted in a new proposed fee schedule which is attached as Exhibit 6. 14. As a result of this new, proposed fee schedule, this Court dismissed the 1982 complaint for superintending control without prejudice. (Exhibit 7, Order of the Supreme Court) 15. Before the 1982 fee schedule could be adopted, however, the Chief Judges reduced the fees and unilaterally promulgated another fee schedule, which is attached to this complaint as Exhibit 8. 16. Later in 1982, Wayne County, seeking to reduce further the fee schedule implemented in 1967, also sought superintending control over the judges, but the Wayne County complaint was dismissed without prejudice. This Court's Order dismissing the Wayne County 1982 complaint is attached as Exhibit 9. 17. Shortly after the Wayne County complaint for superintending control was dismissed, the Chief Judges of the Recorder's Court and the Wayne County Circuit Court enacted a new, revised fee schedule that gradually increased fees in the Wayne County Circuit Court and Recorder's Court. (See Exhibit 10) 18. Shortly after an increased fee schedule was implemented in 1984, as required by Exhibit 10, the Chief Judge of the Recorder's Court for the City of Detroit, acting as Executive Chief Judge for both the Recorder's Court and the Wayne County Circuit Court, unilaterally reduced those fees by issuing an administrative order. (Exhibit 11) The new administrative order, which took effect in 1985, set the trial fees back to the same rate they had been in 1967 in capital cases. 1.9. On July 1, 1988, the Chief Judges of the Recorder's Court and the Wayne County Circuit Court changed the fees again, this time mandating that "flat fees" be paid in every case. (Exhibit 12) Under that schedule, the fee an attorney received would not vary in any given case regardless of the volume or complexity of the work performed. Rather, the attorney's compensation was dependent only on the maximum penalty faced by the defendant. 20. In 1989, some of the plaintiffs in this action, and other plaintiffs, filed another complaint for superintending control in this Court, asking that the "flat fee" schedule be set aside and that reasonable fees be established by this Court. See In the Matter of the Recorder 's Court Bar Association, 443 Mich. 110 (1993). 21. This Court issued an order appointing a Special Master, the Honorable Tyrone Gillespie, to take testimony and make recommendations to the Court. The Special Master issued a report and recommendation suggesting that the flat fee schedule be set aside and that a new schedule be put into place. The schedule recommended by the Special Master consisted of either payment by the hour at $75.00 an hour, or enactment of the 1982 event-based fee schedule, adjusted upward for inflation. (See excerpts from Report of Special Master Tyrone Gillespie, attached to the Memorandum in Support of this Complaint as Exhibit 3). 22. After receiving the Special Master's Report, this Court ordered the case briefed and argued before the full Court. On August 3, 1993, this Court issued its opinion in In the Matter of the Recorder's Court Bar Association, 443 Mich. 110 (1993). In that opinion, this Court held that, among other things: (a) the 1988 flat fee schedule did not provide reasonable fees; (b) a fee is not "reasonable" as required by statute merely because attorneys are available to take cases at that rate; (c) the availability of a procedure to petition for increased fees on an individualized basis did not mitigate against the unreasonableness of the fee schedule; and (d) the Circuit Court should establish another fee schedule that complies with the reasonable fee statute. 23. In 1994, after this Court's decision in In the Matter of the Recorder's Court Bar Association, the Wayne County Circuit Court and Recorder's Court established a new fee schedule, which was apparently not formalized by Administrative Order until 1998. (See Exhibit 1) The new fee schedule established graduated, event-based fees dependent on the seriousness of the offense. This fee schedule, unfortunately, set fees for the defense of some cases that were even lower than the 1967 fee schedule. B. The Current Crisis 24. The fee schedule currently in place, Administrative Order 1998-03, is attached as Exhibit 1. Administrative Order 1998-03 is essentially the fee schedule put in place after this Court's decision in In the Matter of the Recorder's Court Bar Association, with some minor adjustments. 25. On June 25, 2001, the fees were unilaterally reduced by 10% by an administrative action of the Chief Judges. The only rationale given for this unilateral 10% reduction was budget considerations. 26. Fees now being paid pursuant to Administrative Order 1998-03, especially in light of the 10% reduction, defy the legislature's and this Court's mandate that fees be "reasonable compensation for services performed." For example: (A) An attorney can be paid as little as $54 to handle a motion, regardless of its complexity, and regardless of the time necessary to investigate, draft, and argue that motion. (B) The fees paid for investigation and preparation of a defendant's case are not dependent on the time necessary for such work, but rather on the prospective sentence of the defendant. Further, regardless of the time and effort necessary to complete such investigation and preparation, an attorney representing a defendant facing a prospective natural life sentence (cases for which investigation and preparation can take hundreds of hours) can receive a maximum of $225. (C) The fee schedule allows payment for only one visit (at a meager $45) to a prisoner in jail, regardless of the need for lengthy interviews, the oft-enforced restrictions on access to clients, and whether the case requires multiple meetings with a client. (D) The fee schedule sets payment for trial fees in some cases as low as $108 per day, and attorneys earning that sum sometimes spend ten hours in court to earn that fee. 27. These fee constraints create inherent ethical and financial problems for appointed counsel. Simply put, many appointed counsel cannot afford to spend significant time defending clients if they will not be paid for their time. Moreover, the fee schedule by its very nature forces appointed counsel to make difficult, and often unfair, resource allocation decisions; counsel must select which projects to perform and how much time to spend on any particular project. 28. While attorneys are able to petition the Chief Judges for "extraordinary fees" on an individualized basis, this procedure does not remedy the fact that the current fee schedule is "unreasonable" under any meaningful definition. The petition process required to seek extraordinary fees alone deters attorneys from seeking them. Moreover, many of Plaintiffs7 members are hesitant to file the necessary petitions because such petitions would likely prove futile and might negatively affect their abilities to receive future appointments. On those rare occasions in which the Chief Judges grant petitions for "extraordinary fees," the fees granted are still unreasonable, rarely exceeding $25/hour. 29. Additionally, this Court has previously held that the possibility of attorneys petitioning for "extraordinary fees" on an individualized basis does not solve the problem Plaintiffs here seek to remedy. See In re Recorder's Court Bar Ass 'n, 443 Mich. at 135 ("[Tlhe extraordinary fee mechanism fails to provide an adequate legal remedy to cure the systematic unreasonableness of the current compensation system."). 30. Apart from being unreasonable in amount and unrelated to the time spent to complete the tasks for which payment is rendered, in many instances payments from Wayne County to attorneys are significantly delayed. Payment is regularly not received until five months or more after rendering services. C. Plaintiffs' Attempts To Alleviate The Problem. 31. Since the early 1980s, Plaintiffs and others have attempted to alleviate this payments to appointed counsel through negotiation and, when necessary, litigation. Shortly after the illegal 10% across-the-board fee slash due solely to budget considerations, Plaintiffs and others sought the assistance of the Chief Judges, as well as others, to remedy their ills. 32. In the Spring of 2002, Plaintiffs began a series of negotiations with the Chief Judges in an attempt to avoid the necessity of a lawsuit. The Chief Judges repeatedly acknowledged the inadequacy of the current system and the fact that current fees paid appointed counsel were not "reasonable compensation for services performed." WCCBDA presented the Chief Judges with a concrete proposal, attached to this Complaint as Exhibit 13, which its members believed provided "reasonable compensation for services performed." The Chief Judges conceded that WCCBDAYs proposal (Exhibit 13) was reasonable. Yet the Chief Judges refused to enter a new administrative order setting reasonable fees. Instead, the Chief Judges cited their inability to provide reasonable compensation due to an inadequate budget. 33. On August 23,2002, representatives of Plaintiffs attended a hearing of the Ways and Means Committee of the Wayne County Board of Commissioners. Chief Judge Mary Beth Kelly, among others, also attended the hearing. During the hearing, Chief Judge Kelly expressly acknowledged that the current fee schedule in Wayne County failed to provide appointed attorneys with reasonable compensation for services performed. Chief Judge Kelly further conceded that the specific proposal made by Plaintiffs (Exhibit 13) far more accurately reflected the statutory demand of "reasonable compensation" than the current regime. Chief Judge Kelly implored the County Commissioners to provide her with the necessary funding so that she could enter an administrative order complying with the statutory mandate. 34. Despite these concessions and the sheer obviousness that the fee schedule currently in place in Wayne County is illegal, the Chief Judges have failed to enact a schedule compliant with the statutory mandate. V. Violations Of Michigan Statutes 35. The fee schedule currently set by the Chief Judge in the Wayne County Circuit Court violates MCL (A) 5 775.16 for the following reasons: The compensation provided to attorneys under the fee schedule is not reasonably related to the services the attorneys actually perform. In particular, payments made are not based upon the time spent to perform the task for which attorneys seek payment and bear no relationship to the time necessary to perform the tasks for which payment is made. (B) The attorney fees set by the Wayne County fee schedule are less than 15% of the customary and reasonable rate that attorneys receive to defend criminal cases when they are retained by defendants who can afford counsel. (C) The fees set in Wayne County do not even cover appointed counsel's overhead of his or her office, which includes secretarial services, library, and other support services necessary for proper legal representation. (D) The fee schedule deprives indigents accused of felonies in Wayne County of representation by experienced lawyers expert in criminal defense who, because they will not receive reasonable compensation as appointed counsel, engage themselves elsewhere and refuse appointed criminal assignments. In general, the fee schedule drives attorneys from appointed work because of their low rates. (E) The fees are per se unreasonable because: (1) some of the rates provided for in this fee schedule are below the 1967 fee schedule; and (2) most of the rates are below the 1982 fee schedule. Both the 1967 and 1982 schedules are no longer reasonable because of inflation and the rise in the cost of living in Wayne County. (F) The fee schedule in practice operates to overcompensate some attorneys as a result of their clients pleading guilty to the crimes with which they are charged rather than forcing the prosecution to prove its case at trial. Because of the fact that fees for pretrial services are identical whether a case is pled or taken to trial, the fees paid often bear no resemblance to work actually performed. (G) The fee schedule operates as a virtual economic mandate that the vast majority of cases be pled if an attorney accepting appointments is to survive economically. (H) The fee schedule operates in an entirely nonsensical manner by providing the most compensation for the easiest and least cumbersome work, while providing the least compensation for the most difficult and time-consuming projects. 36. The unreasonable fee schedule violates MCR 8.1 10, which provides that the Chief Judge is responsible for effecting compliance by the court with all applicable court rules and provisions of the law. VI. Constitutional Violations 37. The unreasonable fee system in place in Wayne County creates an institutionalized method and system which results in criminal defendants receiving ineffective assistance of counsel in a substantial number of cases. Moreover, by virtue of its effect on attorneys' representation of indigent criminal defendants, the fee schedule operates to discourage attorneys from enforcing their clients' Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendment rights. Overall, the fee schedule and associated problems inherent in the Wayne County appointed criminal defense system produces a systemic violation of the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 20 of the Michigan Constitution. See, e.g., Luckey v. Harris, 860 F.2d 1012, 1017 (I 1th Cir. 1988); State v. Smith, 681 P.2d. 1374, 1378 (Ariz. 1984) (holding that the indigent defense system in place "so overworks attorneys that it violates the right of a defendant to due process and the right to counsel as guaranteed by the Arizona and United States Constitutions"); Makemson v. Martin County, 491 So.2d 1109 (Fla. 1986) (fee schedule "interferes with the sixth amendment right to counsel"); State v. Peart, 621 So.2d 780 (La. 1993) (system itself unconstitutional because "indigent defendants . . . [are] generally not provided with effective assistance of counsel where attorneys for indigent defendants must work with excessive case loads and insufficient support"); Jewel v. Maynard, 383 S.E.2d 536, 543-46 (W.Va. 1989) (same). VII. Relief Requested 38. In In the Matter o the Recorder's Court Bar Association, this Court f determined that the fee schedules in place at that time failed the statutory reasonableness mandate, but the Court did not impose a particular system or fee schedule on the Wayne County Circuit Court. The Court left it up to the Chief Judges to "develop for implementation . . . a payment system that reasonably compensates assigned counsel for services performed consistent with this opinion." Recorder's Court Bar, 143 Mich. at 118. 39. The Chief Judges' actions subsequent to this Court's decision in In the Matter o the Recorder's Court Bar are typical of that which has occurred in the past: the Chief f Judges succumb to county budgetary concerns and fail to implement a plan for reasonable compensation. This Court's past decision makes clear that such decisions are entirely inappropriate and illegal. 40. Therefore, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court enter an Order directing the Chief Judges of the Wayne County Circuit Court to: (A) (B) vacate the current fee schedule; vacate the June 25, 2001 Administrative Order mandating a 10% across-the-board reduction in fees; (C) implement a fee schedule either: (1) establishing payment at an hourly rate of $90; (2) implementing the fee schedule of 1982, adjusted for inflation, as recommended by the Special Master in 1993; or (3) utilizing the more detailed event-based schedule proposed by the WCCBDA (Exhibit 13), which Defendants admit provides reasonable compensation; and (D) ensure prompt payment to attorneys accepting appointments in indigent felony cases and direct that 30 days shall presumptively constitute "prompt" payment. 41. If the Court has any doubt about the facts underlying the allegations in this Complaint, Plaintiffs request that this Court appoint a Special Master to take testimony, review evidence and make recommendations to this Court. 42. Plaintiffs also respectfully request that this Court issue such other writs and orders as the court in good conscience believes are required by the Complaint in this case. Respectfully submitted, Brian D. Sieve Michael B. Slade KIRKLAND & ELLIS 200 East Randolph Drive Chicago, IL 60601 BELLANCA, BEATTIE and DE LISLE P.C. 20480 Vernier Rd Harper Woods, MI 48225 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Dated: November 8,2002 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that the foregoing COMPLAINT FOR WRIT OF SUPERINTENDING CONTROL was served, November 12,2002, upon: The Honorable Timothy Kenny Wayne County Circuit Court 1441 Saint Antoine Detroit, Michgan 48226 by hand delivery The Honorable Mary Beth Kelly Wayne County Circuit Court 701 Coleman A. Young Municipal Center Detroit, Michigan 48226 by hand delivery Frank D. Eaman Mr. Edward Ewell Chief Corporation Counsel Wayne County 600 Randolph, Suite 253 Detroit, Michigan 48206 by hand delivery WAYNE cuuRI I c m L u ~r m lu - L DIVISION PROPOSED A?TORNEY FEE SCHEDULE EVENT 1-7 Pre Exam A01 SENTENCE (MONTHS) 34-120(+1 160-740(+1 LIFE MAXf+l 100 (20) 200 (40) Inves.&Prep Plea Motion Cal. Conf. Final Conf. Hearings,half day 80 Hearings, full day 160 ,Trial, half day 80 160 110 220 70 80 100 (20) 200 (40) 160 130 260 90 90 Trial, full day 160 (10) 320 (20) 110 (10) 210 (20) 420 (40) 140 (10) Sentence 180 60 ' Note: $50 increase for pre-exam Lvaiver program (nonupital) not included above. Nota: Ail Adjourned Hearings excapt those adjourned by Defense receive 115 event fee. The following adjournments a r e considered not u w d by the defense: - 1 Unavailability of defendant . 2. ~navaiiability the court. of 3. Competency referrals requested by the defense. (Under review) For Release June 11,200 1 WAYNE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT CHIEF JUDGE MICHAEL F !;APALA . ADDRESSES COURT DEFICIT Effective October 1, 1997, the Legislature abolished the Detroit Recorder': Court, merging its judges, personnel and firnctions into the Wayne County Circuit Court. At the same t m , legislative enactmem, the Family Division of the Circuit Court was created. The new i e by Wayne County Circuit Court was, and continues to be, located in six sites: the Cobman A Young Municipal Center,the Penobscot Bdding, the Frank Murphy Hall of Justice, the Lincoln Hl of al Jusrice, the Juvenile Detention Facility, and the Westland Branch office. The budget smce court reorganization has not kept pace with the level of finding required for court operalions. The revenues needed by the Court to provide the necessary jc.dicialservices i%rthe people of Detroit aad Wayne County have remained virtually &e same sinct: court reorganization. Unhtunately, the expenditures required to mainrain appropriae, necessary and reasonable services have continued to increase smce October of 1997. Unless and ~Lntil e County t h of Wayne and the State of Michigan provide additional fundiry, the Court must rec!uce its e q e d h r e s and services m order to e l i n h e a d&it which currently stands at I:! d o n dollars. Expenditure increases have occurred in t e following areas: h • Personnel - Incrcam in salnrics and bench for employees, end other wm, necessary to provide the required level of service to those who rely upon the Court. As a result of COW r ~ ~rhe Court was k e d wt salaries and n , ih benefits that were dramatically dif6nmt from division to division T r Corn has l worked diligently with our unions to lessen this gap We continue to be committed to resolving this issue, wie working within t e confines ofour bud st; hl h Security - Costs have dramatically increased to fbl6.U the obli@on to provide a "fe environment for employees, fixdies, children, parries, wi4 • jurors, attorneys, the general public and others who m s utilize the service:; of the court ut m its sevaal locations; • Facilities - Costs of leased space and maintenance have increased. Court reorgauization did not take into consideration the physical, logistical and 6uoding requhments of mdtiple shes. Cost savings for a single opaadon or site have not been realized; Assigned Counsel Fees - Expenditures have increased due to state nlandated hearings i juvenile proceeding. specialized dockers in cMlioal c a x s and personal n protection proceedings i h d y matters. These services are necessary to promote n the $L and pmmpt diisition of cases and ro m u r e public safety., Technology - Including the increased cost of network cormnunications bemen court kcilities and other related agencies; and computers, miin@, hardware, soffware and programming; In order to achieve the required decrease in expenditures, it is absolutely ru:cessary rhat I order s p e * reductions. ~ c c o r d i n ~ l ~ , effcnive June 25,200 1, the following redxtiom, wirh the exception of security, will be put in place: Personnel - In an e&rt to avoid immediate layo&, payless paydays and/or interruption of services, all personnel need to accept a reduction or z:djustment in pay. The present level ofbenefh will be dmained; Sea& - The present level will be maintained; t ~ of m Assigned Counsel Fees Across the board reddon of scheduled p 10% per case. T i reduction win aBkt the private har and the Lega!Aid and hs Defender's Associatioa; Technology - Development win be c d to provide only mahtenmce and continuity of senice, ie., help desk and network communications: In an attempr to evaluate those concerns associated with fhdmg requiremen3 and hdations, the Court, i conjunction with Wayne C o w , will soon engage professional services n to identi@, review and resolve issiles associated with court reorganization and fundirlg. It i my belief that these changes, along wt necessary assistance &om the ailte, corny s ih and federal govftlrments, will achieve our budget objectives by the end ofthe next *gal year. CIRCUIT COURT-WAYNE COUNTY Rule 14.5 Rule 14.5 Fees f o r Assigned C o u n s e l . Any attorney assigned by a judge of this court to defend an indigent person charged with a crime, shall, before .payment there!or. file with the Clerk a written statement that he has not received or been promised payment from any other source. On certification of the trial judge. such attorney shall be entitled in rcccive from thc Wayne County Tmasurer: ( a ) A fec not to excecd S50.00 f o r appearance 11). the attorney a t a r r a i ~ n m e n on thc warrant. t ( b ) X fcc for appearance by the attorncy a t the esaminntion: If Esamination is tvaived. $50.00 If Exaniination is adjourned a t the rcquest of lhc prosccutor o r on Court's own motion. each adjournment, but not to cxcecd iwo adjournments. S5.0.00. If Esnrnirlation is conducted wherc tcstimon!~ is taltcn or if ?:lotion lo Dismiss is granted for each day o r portion thcrcof. SlU0.00. ( c ) 8 1 l'ce f o r appcarance by the attorney a t thc arraignment in Circuit Court. f50.00. ( d l I\ fcc lor prcparation of casc lor trial in Circuit Court; dcfcndant on bond, including plea. $100.00: F o r prcparation of m e for trial in Circuit Court: If dcfctldant is in jail and is intcnvic\vedby attorney a t the jail, including plea. S123.00. (el A lee for appearance on written Motion in Circuit Court when the Motion is acti~ally argued: A fee of up to ,$50.00 to be a\vardcd a t the discretion 01 the judgc hearing the Motion. (I) In addition, s fee for attendance in Circuit Court lor trial: Cascs ill \r#hicli the maximum penalty is life imprisonment, for cach day o r portion thereof, $150.00: All other cases, for each day o r portion thereof, $100.00. ( g ) A fee for appearance a t time of sentence. S50.00. (11) A lee l o r appeamnce a t probation violation hearing: For cach onc-half day. $50.00. ti1 :\ :\ i1(.1'1 fl?c for appcalxncc a t sanity hcarirlg. for each day o r iotl t11rl.cof. S100.00. lili~l!: 01 111.i1'rs IIICI.CO(. ZIiJ I 1.11 itb(: Tur lilili.; \vri\lcti blotion for ncte trial ant1 :~rguing 1111. i i l l l l t . , --- PIC., S3O.00. ' Rule 14.5 CIRCUIT COURT-WAYNE COUNTY (k) In all cases of appeals to a higher court, a fee not to exceed S50.00 for each one-half day spent in the Circuit Court, plus $100.00 for every 400 pages of transcript, o r major fraction thereof, but not less than $100.00; plus $250.00 for all proceedings in the higher court where claim of appeal and brief is filed. Xo attorney appointed pursuant to this rule shall incur any cspensc to the county in preparing the indigent's defense without writIcn permission of the trial judge o r of the presiding judgc, except for ort1inal.y witncss fees. Upon its adoption, this rule shall be effective for all services rentlerctl suhscqucnt thereto. Amended July 26, 1368. Rule 14.6 Rule Payment of Counsel for Appeals. R e p o r i s in C r i m i n a l A c t i o n s . [Repealed] 14.7 A11 probation, psychiatric, psychological and medical rcports submitted to the court to aid It in passing sentence in criminal cases shall be dcemcd suppressed information and shall be kept confidential, and the conlelits thereof shall not be published without consent of the COUL't. Pio probation officer, clerk o r other officer of this court. nor any other person, shall divulge any information contained in such reports. escept to those entitled to access thereto a s provided by law. RULE 15-PATERNITY ACTIONS CALENDAR (Attorneys filing paternity c a p l a i n t s shotrld consult the Prosecl~tinqAttorney's Olfice, or the Paternity Division of the Friend of the Court as to the proper procedure and f o m ) . Rule 15.1 Issuance of S u m m o n s o r W a r r a n t . Upon filing of a paternity complaint with the Clerk of the Court a summons shall issue, o r if a warrant is requested, the paternity comx plaint shall I referred to the Presiding Judge, who may issue a warrant itlstcacl of a summons. l'hc summons shall require the defendant to appcnr before the I':.~..I* Jill:: . I L I ~ 011 c ~ ~ Friday a t 10:00 A.M. to adniit or tlcl~ygalcrr~ily ;IS .#'I (g11.111 thc complaint. in 558 Sce Adrrrbrirrruril~c Orders -1972.2' orrd I P. I : in Adrrritristrori~~e ~ ~ Ordcrs. Volt~r~tc .u .ro asris.~trdcotrrtsrl for i r r d i g ~ ~ ~ d c f c t t c h icr rcrirui!l$ wses. I ~ s ~ c e ' ~ ~ r r r i r r i s t r u r Ortlcr 1975.9 as t o appoirrrtrrorr of cotrrtsel in ccrrain i~e ' . Sec. I. Volunteer Legal Cottnsel. If it is made to appear by affidavit o f Ihe defendant or o t h e r ~ i s e ,that defendant is an indigent person, the Examining hlagistrale may grant permission for temporary volunteer counsei lo r r v e wilhoul compensation and to assist the defendant before proceeding uith the Xrraignmcnl. k c . 2. Appoirited Leg31 Counsel. At the conclusion o f the Arraignment o n Ihe \Varrant the case of tlle indigent defendant shall be referred to the Residing Judge for the appointrntnt of trial counsel. as provided by h w , afio dtall ptrsondly represent the defendant in all further proceedings. Appointed counsel shall not be removed except upon notice and hearing &d for good cause. Sec. 3. Fee Schedule for Assigned Counsel. An attorney assigned by a Judge o f this Court pursuant to law to defend o r represent an indigent n pcrson i any matter within the jurisdiction o f this Court shall file with the Clerk o f the Court a written statement to the eKect that he has not theretofore received nor has he requested nor been p r o m i a d payment from any other source. - '* Any such attorney who accepts or solicits payr~ientfrom any other'source for his services as assigned counsel in this Court shall be subject t o punislrrt~enlfor contempt. On certification a f the judge before whom such service was rendered o r Ihe Presiding Judge. such ;Itturney sl~allbe entitled to receive frorn the Wayne County Treasurer corr~pcnsation i n accordance with the Fee EXAMINING MAGISTRATE COURT RCR 10 Scl~edulefor Assigned Cuunscl as the urrle shall be arliended and revised frorn time t o time. Tlic currcnt Fee Schedule is attached as an appendix lo APPENDIX Illis Rule. Fee Schedule for Attorneys Assiyed t o Defend Iridigerit Fclot~yDtftr~dants. (Eff. May 27. 1970) On certificatiori o r the Trial Judge. an atlorirey slmll be entitled to receive from the Wayr~eCounty Treasurer: ' (a) a fee for appearance by the attorney at the Examination: If examination is waivcd-550.00 If Exan~ination is conducted where testimony is taken, or if Slotion to Dismiss is granted, for each day o r pcrtion t l i c r e o f ~ ~ 5 5 0 . 0 0 (b) a fee for preparation o f case for trial, includirrg plca. .5 100.00 If defendant is interviewed by the attorney at Wayne County Jail, the fee for preparation, including plea, shall be-5 125.00 (c) a fee for appearance o n written htotion wlien the htotion is actually argued-up t o 550.00 to be awarded at the discretion of the Judge Ilearing Uie Motion (d) in addition, a fee for attendance in Court for trial: Cases in which the maximum pcnalty is life in~prisonr~lent, the first Tor day and for each succeeding day or fraction tlicreof--5150.00 All other cases - 5 100.00 (e) a fee for appearance at tiriie o f r n l c ~ i c e - 5 5 0 . 0 0 (I) a fee for appearatrce at probation violation hearing for each onc.lialf Cy--550.00 (g) a fee for appearance at uriity hearing for each day or portion thereof. - 5 100.00 (h) a fee for liling arillcn hfotion for Xcw Trial and arguing the u m e . liling o f briefs tlrereuf, etc ... SSO.OO (i) in all cases of appeals to a higher court, a f e e of 5100.00 for cvcry 4 0 0 pages o f tnnscripl. or major fraction tllcreof. but not less llran 5100.00; plus 5250.00 for all proceedings in llie Ilid~crcourt where clairn of appeal m d brief is filed. (j) for a necessary visit t o Jackson or other prison facility within 3 n d i u s of 100 miles, an expense allowance o f 5100.00 and for distances in excess of t l ~ a tradius, an cxpcrise allowance of S 150.00 fi) for attcn~lariceat police show.ups on ; ~ s s i g r ~ ~ l ~ c ntlic Court, 525.00 of t for each hour or fraction thereof. . Upon its adoption. this rule sltall be effective for a11 xrvices rendered mbscqtrent tllcrcto. .- Rule 14.13 F c c s - ~ t t n r l , e ~ Indigent Prrson. - ' for An attorney assigned by a judge of this court to defend an indigcnt person charged uith a cri~neshall, before payment therefor, tile with the Clerk a written statemcnt that he has not received or been promised payment from - any other source. - - - I .- -- CRIMINAL CALENDAR WCCR 14 On ccrtitication of the, trial judge, the attorney is entitled 'to receive from I -.- the Wayne County Treasurer: (a) A fee not to exceed. 550.00 for appearance by the attorney at arraignment on the warrant. For interviewing the accused subsequent to arraignment on the' warrant but before and in preparation for the preliminary s examhation, the fee i 550.00 when the defendant is in custody and 525.00 when the defendant is on bond. (b) A fee for appearance by the attorney at the examination: If Examination is waived, 550.00, ., - Y i L If Examination ir adjourned at the request o f the prosecutor or on Court's own motion, each adjournment, but not to exceed two adjournments, s50.00. If Exahination is conducted where testimony is taken or if hfotion to Dismiss is granted for each day or portion thereof, S1OO.OO. (c) A fee for appearance by the attorney at the arraignment in Circuit Court. 5 50.00. (d) A fee for preparation of caw for trial in Circuit Court; defendant on bond. including plea, S 100.00: For preparation o f ca'ie for trial in Circuit Court; If deferidant is in jail and is interviewed by attorney at the jail, including plea. S 125.00. (e) A fee for appearance on written Motion in Circuit Court when the Motion is actually argued; A fee of up to 550.00 to be awarded at rhe discretion o f the judge hearing :lie hfotion. (I) In addition. a fee for attendance in Circuit Court for Trial: Cases in which the maximum pcnalty is life imprisonnicnt. for each day or portion tiicrcof. 5 150.CO; ,411 other cases. for each day or portion thereof, 5 100.00. (g) A fce for appcarancc at time of sentence. 550.00. (h) A fee for appearance at p r o b ~ t i o nviolation hearing; For each onc.half day. s50.00. (i) A fee for appearance at sanily hearing, for each day or portion thereof, 5 1 00.oo. (j) A fee for filing written hfotion for new trial and arguing the same. ming of briefs thereof, etc.. SSOW. (k) In all u s e s of appeals to a higher court, a fee not to exceed 550.00 for each one.half day spent in the Circuit Court. plus 5100.00 for every 400 pages of transcript. or major fraction thereof. but not less than 5100.00; plus 5250.00 for all proceedings in the higher court where claim of appeal and brief is tiled. (I) A fee for appearance at show ups and habeas corpus. 550.00. No attorney appointed pursuant to this rule h a l l incur any expense -10 the ' L.' . . __. -7 - ) . ' - WAYNE CIRCUIT COURT RULES ' county in preparing the intiigcnt's d c r c n v u i t h o u t written pc~miriionof *c trial judge or of the piesiding judge, except for ordinary witness fees. Upon its adoption. this rule shall be effective for all rrn'ces rendered subrcqucnt thereto. History Am. cff. iune IS, 1971 14.13 P ~ l Cirtltii Coari ~ s anb . fur ff!c EI!ub 3 u b u i t l l C i r r u i f of f n i r h i y a n tilt x l r r o r b r r ' s Court f u r fbr Cifa of Yrfrnif . 1201 - CITY- COL'XTY BUILDING DETROIT. X I C I I I G A S 48920 J u n e 2 8 , 1982 H o n o r a b l e Mary S. Coleman Chief J u s t i c e M i c h i g a n Supreme C o u r t P . 0. Box 30052 L a n s i n g , M I 48909 Dear C h i e f J u s t i c e Coleman: - . The b e n c h e s o f b o t h R e c o r d e r ' s C o u r t f o r t h e C i t y o f D e t r o i t and t h e T h i r d J u d i c i a l C i r c u i t C o u r t have approved t h e proposed a t t o r n e y f e e schedule f o r the r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of i n d i g e n t defendants f o r implementation a s o f D e c e n b e r 1 , 1982. I t i s my i n t e n t t o s u b c i t t h i s s c h e d u l e t o t h e "-.j n e C o u n t y Eozrd o f A u d i t o r s f o r i n c l u s i o n i n t h e f i n a l na 1982-1983 budget. Under s e p a r a t e c o v e r , o u r c o u r t a d x i n i s t r a t o r w i l l be f o r w a r d i n g a l e t t e r t o Mr. Hoag t o r e p e a l L o c a l C o u r t R u l e 1 4 . 1 3 f o r t h e T h i r d C i r c u i t and t h e a p p r o p r i a t e a p p e n d i x t c L o c a l C o u r t Rule 1 0 f o r R e c o r d e r ' s Court. 1 : was i u r t n e r a g r e e d o y e a c h s c h e d u l e w i l l be u t i l i z e d i n b o t h c o u r t s . - court that this P l e a s e do n o t h e s i t a t e t o c o n t a c t me i f you r e q u i r e further i ~ ~ f o r ~ a t i o n . Very t r u l y y o u r s , 8 : .. .-- / R i c h a r d D. Dunn Cc H o r o r ~ b l eE ~ ~ u C . l G ~ r d n e r , e E x e c u t i v e C h i e f Judge Pro t e c K T . L. K. 2 z c 3 b s , I ' . FEE SCHEDULE F R KSICIJED COUIISEL F R TiE O O . THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT AND RECORDER'S C U T F R T E CITY OF DiZiROIT OR O H . Arr~ignrnenton t h e Warrant Pre-exam J a i l Visit (one o n l y ) waived Preliminary Exanination ItiV.L - conducted 150. C F i r s t Post Exzm J a i l Visit 50. C Second Post E x a n J a i l Visit . 35.C 1 C a p i t a l Cases: 1 0 more than t h r e e v i s i t s tlcn-capital Cases: N more than two v i s i t s o 75" C; I n v e s t i g a t i o n and R e p a r a t i o n o f Cases f o r T r i a l o r Ple2 X r i t t e n Eotion with E r i e f and Oral Argument . . (Excepting standard d i s c o v e r y o r d e r s ) 75.0: Calendar Conference and Arraignment on Information (For each apperrance) 50. OC F i n a l Cdnference (For each appearance a s long a s adjournsent not by defense) 50. OC d a l k e r Hearing One-half b y or Less 75-OC 150. OC F u l l Day and Each Day Thereafter I v i d e n t i a r y Hearing - h e - h a l f Day o r Less 75 OC 150.0C F u l l Day and Each Day T h e r e a f t e r ;ttendance i n Court f o r T r i a l 'Per Day o r F r a c t i o n Thereof C a p i t a l Cases 450. OC l l c n - c a p i k l Cases 300. OC '1 ea 109.00 50.00 'orensic Sanity Hearing Witnesses Kaived Hearing Held, h e - h a l f Dzy 75.00 Hearing Held, F u l l Day 150.00 75.00 t t e n d a c e i n Ccurt f o r Sentence roSaticn Violaticn Rearing 75. 00 cr.-frivolous Pation f o r t;ew T r i a l Together Kith Nemorandus of i;u by T r i a l Counsel After 125.00 a Jury o r Non- jury t r i a l - - . - - ' rznscript Every $00 F;Ees o r rrajor f r a c t i c n t h e r m f o t h e r than g u i l t y plea cases Guilty plea c a s e s l a i n of A;?eal, E t i e f and A 1 1 Proceedings Other than g ~ i l t y plea c a s e s G u i l t y plea c a s e s : r i t t o Priscn F a c i l i t i e s : Uzyne county F a c i l i t i e s .. Czzp F e l l s t o n and a l l U F a c i l i t i e s P A 1 1 Cthers - - 200.00 100.00 500.00 350.00 75.00 400.00 200.00 . FEE SCHEDULE L2y. htanzby Fer b u r ~chiztr:z:s - Czses i n Vriich t h e Ezrimum Penalty is L i f e L:?risonnent Interview and t l r i t t e n Evaluation , Attendance i n .Court -. n v E x p e r t s - I n t e r v i e w and W r i t t e n lI~...luuaticn Attendance i n Court trpreterc Fer Cay Hzlf Cay 2;-ugs ZCE":.!;EO3S - rull .. - 1 . ~ugurt' . --b k par d cnu Lord ow cknnvd & bub3ird and rij.Scy rro. MARY S. COLEMAN. Chiel Jua ice. THOMAS G1L.ES KAVANAGH. G. M E N N U WILLIAMS. CHARLES L L P l N . JOHN W. FITZGERALD. THE DETROIT BAR ASSOCIATION, ET U , JAMES Plaintiffs, v CHIEF JUDCT OF Tlif THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT and CHIEF JUDGE OF !rHE RECORDER'S COUlU OF TElE CITY OF B U l R MOODY. JR. Asrocule Justices 68204 L RYAN. SC: DETROIT, in t h e i r r o l e s as 'presiding judgesm -of tbosr courts, .- -- Defendants, . . the Court, the motion for immediate consideration i s considered, and it is CRAHTED.. The complaint for superintending c o n t r o l i s considered. It appearing t h ~ the bencher of the Recorder's Court for t h e C i t y t of D e t r o i t and the T h t d J u d i c i a l Circuit have approved a new proposed attorney fee schedule for the representation of i n d i g a t defendants for bplemeatation AS of December 1, 1 9 8 2 , the c o n p l a i n t Ls DENIED without pcejuUce to the plaintiffs8 t i g h t to, r e i n s t i t u t e appropriate proceedbgc i n the evcnt tht th aw propoced f e e s c h e d u l ~i s not pot into effect. On order of STA1 E OF MIC!iIGAN . . I. Hudd I i n a ~Ckrt d k S u p m e Caul dlk S l r ~ c M k l t ; p ~ kxrrby cutif1 lhU t rorcgciry . d do k W and c a r & Coir) d r n w k r c ~ ~ c in d r F3jd colM i rv;d OUR: t b I ~hrtr c m p r d thc w b h h tt a on'inrl. 4 t b . ~ n r h c t n n ~ u i p it Ibcrdrom, md 6 c ~ l - n k stid w+nd a . d & I - . t l 7FS71hfOHY iblIERWF. I ha t a ~ H m kw " m y wd , T- t S w d d mid Suptrnc Cwm f id fZ14 . t 5 . 4 .% ia ~ t -)tL V PI CIY 1.<,6 o x 1le11;Fd d~qh~;.i;:d<; r f 3 Z r j tvo. - . .. - - -- TATE. OF M l CH l GAN 'HIRD J U D I C I A L CIRCUIT COURT :€CORDER1 COURT S JOINT ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 1 NO. 1982-1 A t a session of said court held i n R o o m 1 2 0 1 Ci t y - C o u n t y Bui'l d i n g , D e t r o i t , M i c h i g a n 48226 o n N O V E M B E R 22, 1 9 8 2 PRESENT: H o n o r a b l e R i c h a r d D. D u n n , Executive Chief Judge Pursuant Schedule for Court, services each to a review of the Assigned Counsel Fee the Third Judicial Circuit Court Bench approved after the attached 30, fee and Recorder's schedule attorneys for for performed November 1982 by indigent d.efendants. IT IS HEREBY O R D E R E D o n b e h a l f o f b o t h c o u r t s t h a t the aforementioned for Fee Schedule of for Assigned Counsel be ut i I ired reminerat ion attorneys representing indigent defendants for services performed after November 3 0 , 1982. 2 i c h a r d D. D u n n E x e c u t i v e Chi.ef j u d g e , ! , FEE SOiEDULE FOR A S S IGNRT Arralgnmsnt on Warrant Pre-exam r UNSEL REVISED 10173 .#: J a i i V i s i t (one o n l y ) Office Vlslt - - $ 75. Preliminary Examination First Post Exam Jail Visit Second Post E x a m Jal 1 Visit C a p i t a l G s e s : No m o r e than three vislts Non-capital Cases: N o m o r e than .two vlsits I n v e s t i g a t l o n a n d P r e p a r a t i o n of C a s e s f o r T r i a l or P l e a W r i t t e n M o t i o n w i t h B r l e f a n d O r a l A r g u m e n t (Excepting s t a n d a r d d i s c o v e r y o r d e r s ) C a l e n d a r C o n f e r e n c e a n d A r r a i g n m e n t o n i n f o r m a t i o n (For e a c h a p p e a r a n c e ) F i n a l C o n f e r e n c e ( F o r each a p p e a r a n c e as long as adjournment not by defense) Walker Hear i ng One-half D a y or L e s s Ful I D a y and E a c h D a y Thereafter One-half D a y or L e s s Evidentiar-j H e a r i n g Full D a y and E a c h D a y Thereafter A t t e n d a n c e In C o u r t f o r T r i a l P e r D a y or F r a c t i o n T h e r e o f Capital Cases Non-capital C a s e s P I ea Forensic Hearing Witnesses Waived H e a r i n g Held, One-half D a y H e a r i n g Held, F u l l D a y A t t e n d a n c e in C o u r t for S e n t e n c e Probation Violation Hearing N o n - f r i v o l o u s M o t i o n for New Trial T o g e t h e r W i t h M e m o r a n d u m o f L a w by T r i a l C o u n s e l A f t e r a j u r y or Non-jury trial 50. 25. 125. 50. 35. - - - 150. 75. 50. 50. 75. 150. 75. 150. 300. 200. 100.; 50. 75.' 150.' 75.' 75.f 125.C - ' APPEALS Transcript - E v e r y 400 pages or m a j o r fraction t h e r e o f other t h a n guilty p l e a c a s e s G u i l t y plea cases C l a i m of A p p e a l , B r i e f a n d All P r o c e e d i n g s Visit to Prison Facilities - Other than gui 1 ty plea cases G u l lty plea c a s e s Wayne County Facilities Camp P e l l s t o n and all UP Facilities A1 I Others A p p e a l t o H i g h e r C o u r t for each. one-half d a y sent i n trial court:, . . - : Appearance Z t Habeas Corpus - .-- M I S C E L L A N E O U S F E E SCHEDULE Show-ups Full D a y S t a n d b y Per Hour P s y c h i a i r i s t r i c C a s e s in W h i c h the M a x i m u m P e n a l t y is L i f e Imprisonment I n t e r v i e w and W r i t t e n Evaluation A t t e n d a n c e in C o u r t Other Experts I n t e r v i e w and W r i t t e n Evaluation A t t e n d a n c e in C o u r t Per Day 1nttrpreter.s Half Day - - ';cn-trial . , Appearance A T A SLS5IO\ OF I H E S L P K E X I E COURT O F T H E S T A T E O F .511CHIGA,?J. Hcld Room. in ~ h c I I of Lansing. on the C ~ - . a 4, 1 1 the Supreme 8th - i2Ez day of April -- in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and eighty -three. Present t h e Honorable 6 , KENNEN W I L L I A M S , Chief J u s t i c e WAYNE COUNTY, a Michigan county, Plaintiff, and THE DETROIT BAR ASSOCIATION, et al, Intervening Plaintiffs, THOMAS G I L E S KAVANAGH, CHARLES L . L E V I N , J A K E S L , RYAN, JAMES H. B R I C K L E Y , M I C H A E L Fa CAVANAGH, Associate Justices CHIEF JUDGE OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, CHIEF JUDGE OF THE RECORDER'S COURT FOR THE CITY OF DETROIT, and STATE COURT ADMINISTRATOR, in their official capacities, Defendants. On order of the Court, the complaint for superintending control and the briefs and oral argument of the parties have been considered. It has become evident that the record in this original proceeding is an inadequate basis for decision because of factual questions and disputes which must be resolved before judgment, but which have never been the subject of proofs by the parties. Accordingly, it is ordered that the complaint for superintending control be DISMISSED. This dismissal is without prejudice to the institution of an appropriate action in circuit court by any of the parties to this action or by individuals or entities not parties to this action for a determination of the duty to pay or the right to be paid in accordance with a fee schedule for the compensation of lawyers representing indigent defendants. The emergency motion to compel payment of assigned counsel and the motion for order of discovery are accordingly denied. STATE OF HICHICAS -- SS. I , CORBIN R. DAVIS. C l e r k o f t h e Supreme C o u r t o f t h e S t a t e o f M i c h i g a n . d o h e r e b y c e r t i f y t h a t t h e f o r e g o i n g is a t r u e and c o r r e c t copy o f a n o r d e r e n t e r e d i n s a i d c o u r t i n s a i d c a u s e ; t h a c 1 h a v e compared t h e same w i t h t h e o r i g i n a l . a n d t h a t i t i s a t r u e t r a n s c r i p t therefrom, and t h e whole of s a i d o r i g i n a l o r d e r . 1 N TESTIHOhT WHEREOF, I h a v e h e r e u n t o s e t my hand and a f f i x e d t h e s e a l o f s a i d Supreme C o u r t a t Lansing t h i s 8 " day of i n t h e y e a r of o u r Lord o n e t h g u s a n d n i n e h u n d r e d and e i g h t y - t h r e e . . . STATE O MICHIGAN F THIRD JUDICIAL C I R C U I T C U T O R AND RECORDER'S COURT JOINT ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 1983-1 A t a s e s s i o n o f s a i d C o u r t , h e l d i n Room 1201 City-County B u i l d i n g , D e t r o i t , Michigan on A p r i l 28, 1 9 8 3 ' PRESENT: HONORABLE RICHARD D . DUNN E x e c u t i v e Chief Judge P u r s u a n t t o a r e v i e w o f t h e Assigned Counsel Fee Schedule h e r e t o f o r e a d o p t e d b y t h e i s s u a n c e o f J o i n t A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Order No. 1982-1, d a t e d November 2 2 , 1982; Upon a p p r o v a l b y t h e - ~ u d g e s f e a c h o f s a i d C o u r t s , r e s p e c o tively; IT I S HEREBY ORDERED on b e h a l f o f b o t h of s a i d C o u r t s t h a t t h e Assigned Counsel Fee Schedule promulgated under J o i n t Administ r a t i v e O r d e r No. 1982-1 be, and same h e r e b y i s s e t a s i d e and Fee and "D" which a r e S c h e d u l e s d e s i g n a t e d S c h e d u l e s "A", "B", "C" a t t a c h e d h e r e t o and made a p a r t h e r e o f , a r e h e r e b y adopted nunc p r o t u n c a s o f December 1, 1982 and t h a t s a i d Schedules be u .t i l ized i n f i x i n g remuneration of a t t o r n e y s f o r s e r v i c e s rendered w i t h i n t h e d a t e s d e s i g n a t e d i n e a c h Schedule, t i o n of i n d i g e n t d e f e n d a n t s . i n the representa- A TRUE copY CLERK BY. E x e c u t i v e Chief Judge ~c l n c A a m l n l s c r a c l v e C r d e r Xo. 1 9 8 3 - 1 ScY,edule "A" FEE SCHEDULE E f f e c t i v e D e c e m b e r 1 , 1982 t o A p r i l 30, 1983 f o r s e r v i c e s r e n d e r e d f o r above d a t e s . -. - FOR ASSIGNED COUNSEL $ J a i l V i s i t (one o n l y ) Off.ice V i s i t Preliminary Examination H e l d or Waived Adjourned + F i r s t P o s t Exam j a i I V i s i t S e c o n d Pos t Exam j a1 I V l s i t C a p i t a l Cases: No m o r e t h a n t h r e e v i s i t s N o n - c a p i t a l Cases: No m o r e t h a n t w o v i s i t s I n v e s t i g a t i o n and P r e p a r a t i o n o f Cases f o r T r i a l o r P l e a i n T r i a l C o u r t W r i t t e n M o t i o n w i t h B r i e f and O r a l Argument ( E x c e p t i n g s t a n d a r d d i s c o v e r y o r d e r s ) Ca l e n d a r C o n f e r e n c e and A r r a i gnment on I n f o r m a t i o n ( F o r e a c h a p p e a r a n c e ) F i n a l C o n f e r e n c e ' ( F o r each a p p e a r a n c e as l o n g as a d j o u r n m e n t n o t b y d e f e n s e ) Walker H e a r i n g One-half Day o r Less F u l l Day a n d E a c h D a y T h e r e a f t e r Evident i a r y Hearing One-half Day o r Less F u l l Day and E a c h D a y T h e r e a f t e r Plea Dismissal flRROCU on T r i a l , D a y i n T r i a l C o u r t Witnesses Waived F o r e n s ic H e a r i n g H e a r i n g H e l d , One-ha1 f D a y H e a r i n g H e l d , F u l l Day A t t e n d a n c e i n C o u r t f o r T r i a l Per Day o r F r a c t i o n T h e r e o f C a p i t a l Cases N o n - c a p i t a l Cases Attendance i n Court f o r Sentence P r o b a t i o n V i o l a t i o n and E x t r a d i t i o n H e a r i n g APPEALS N o n - f r i v o l o u s M o t i o n f o r New T r i a l T o g e t h e r W i t h Memorandum o f L a w by T i i a l C o u n s e l A f t e r a J u r y o r N o n - j u r y t r i a l A r r a i g n m e n t on W a r r a n t Pre-exam - - 75.00 50.00 25 .OO 125 .OO 7 5 .OO SO. 00 35.00 - - - - - 150 .OO 75.00 50.00 50 .OO 75.00 150 .OO 75 .OO 150.00 100.00 50 .OO 75.00 150.00 300 .OO 200 .OO 75 .OO 75 .OO 125 .OO Transcript - E v e r y 400 p a g e s o r m a j o r f r a c t i o n t h e r e o f o t h e r t h a n g u i l t y p l e a cases Gu i l t y p l ea c a s e s C l a i m o f Appeal, B r i e f a n d . A1 I P r o c e e d i n g s V i s i t to Prison Facilities - Other t h a n g u i It y p l e a c a s e s G u i l t y p l e a cases Wayne C o u n t y F a c i l i t i e s Camp P e l l s t o n and a 1 I UP F a c i l i t i e s A l l Others A p p e a l t o H i g h e r C o u r t f o r e a c h o n e - h a l f day s p e n t i n t r i a l c o u r t Appearance a t Habeas C o r p u s MI SCELLMEOUS FEE SCHEDULE Show-ups F u l l Day Standby Per Hour P s y c h i a t r i c C a s e s i n w h i c h t h e Maximum P e n a l t y i s L i f e I m p r i s o n m e n t I n t e r v i e w and W r i t t e n E v a l u a t i o n Attendance i n Court Other Experts I n t e r v i e w and W r i t t e n E v a l u a t i o n Attendance i n Court Interpreters Per Day H a l f Day - - 200.00 50 .OO 300.00 150.00 200.00 150 .OO 150 .OO 75 .OO 150.00 .75.00 -- - - PATERN l TY Preparation - .----. - m Order No. 1983-1 ' Schedule "B" FEE SCHEDULE FOR ASSIGNED COUNSEL A r r a i g n m e n t on W a r r a n t Pre-exam F o r S e r v i c e s R e n d e r e d ?day 1 , 1 9 8 3 t o A ~ r I i 3 0 , 1 9 8 4 . - - J a i I V i s i t (one o n l y ) Office Visit H e l d or W a i v e d Preliminary Examination Adjourned F i r s t P o s t Exam J a i l V i s i t S e c o n d P o s t Exam J a i l V i s i t Capita.1 Cases: No m o r e t h a n t h r e e v i s i t s N o n - c a p i t a l Cases: No m o r e t h a n t w o v i s i t s I n v e s t i g a t i o n and P r e p a r a t i o n o f Cases f o r T r i a l o r P l e a i n T r i a l C o u r t W r i t t e n M o t i o n w i t h . B r i e f and O r a l A r g u m e n t ( E x c e p t i n g s t a n d a r d d i s c o v e r y o r d e r s ) C a l endal: C o n f e r e n c e and A r r a i gnment on I n f o r m a t i on ( F o r e a c h a p p e a r a n c e ) F i n a l C o n f e r e n c e ( F o r each a p p e a r a n c e as l o n g as a d j o u r n m e n t n o t b y d e f e n s e ) One-ha1 f D a y o r L e s s Walker H e a r i n g F u l l Day a n d Each D a y T h e r e a f t e r Evidentiary Hearing One-half Day or Less F u l l Day a n d Each D a y T h e r e a f t e r Plea Dismissal nROC"n T r i a l Day i n T r i a l C o u r t Forensic Hearing Witnesses Waived H e a r i n g H e l d , One-ha1 f D a y H e a r i n g H e l d , F u l I Day A t t e n d a n c e i n C o u r t f o r T r i a l Per Day o r F r a c t i o n T h e r e o f C a p i t a l Cases N o n - c a p i t a l Cases Attendance i n Court f o r Sentence P r o b a t i o n V i o l a t i o n and E x t r a d i t i o n H e i r i n g AP PEALS N o n - f r i v o l o u s M o t i o n f o r New T r i a l T o g e t h e r W i t h Memorandum o f L a w by T r i a l Counsel A f t e r a J u r y or Non-jury t r i a l - $ 60.00 50.00 - - 60 .OO 15.00 10.00 ." - - - - - 11 5.00 60.00 50.00 35.00 60.00 115.00 60.00 1 1 5 .OO 65.00 15.00 25.00 115.00 2 0 0 .OO 1 3 5 .OO 60.00 60 .OO 75 .OO Transcript - E v e r y 400 pages or m a j o r f r a c t i o n t h e r e o f o t h e r t h a n g u i l t y p l e a cases G u i l t y - p ! ea c a s e s C l a i m o f Appeal, B r i e f a n d A1 I P r o c e e d i n g s V i s i t to Prlson Facilities - Other t h + n gui It y p l e a cases G u i l t y pi'hp cases \ Wayne C o u n t y ' f a c i I i t i e s Camp P e l l s t o n and a l l UP F a c i l i t i e s A1 I O t h e r s A p p e a l t o H i g h e r C o u r t f o r each o n e - h a l f d a y s p e n t i n t r i a l c o u r t Appearance a t Habeas Corpus - MISCELLANEOUS FEE SCHEDULE. Show-ups F u l I Day Standby Per Hour P s y c h i a t r i c C a s e s i n w h i c h t h e Maximum P e n a l t y i s L i f e I m p r i s o n m e n t I n t e r v i e w and W r i t t e n E v a l u a t i o n Attendance i n Court Other Experts I n t e r v i e w and W r i t t e n E v a l u a t i o n Attendance i n Court Interpreters P e r Day H a l f Day PATERN l TY Preparation N o n - t r i a l C o u r t Appearance - -. - .- A - , . - 165.00 50 .OO 265 .OO 135.00 1 6 5 .OO 1 0 0 .oo - 85 .OO 45 .OO 11 5.00 75 .OO 1 1 5.00 - 7 o r d e r No. 1983-1 Schedule "C" F C E S Q I E D U L E FOR A S S I G N E D C O U N S E L Arraignment on Warrant Pre-exam - F o r S e r v i c e s R e n d e r e d M a y 1 , 1984 t o N o v e m b e r 3 0 , 1 9 8 4 . -. - $ J a i l Visit ( o n e only) Office Visit P r e ! i m i n a r y E x a m i n a t i o n - H e l d or W a i v e d - Adjourned First Post E x a m Jail Visit Second Post E x a m Jail Visit Capital Cases: N o m o r e than three visits Non-capital Cases: N o m o r e than two visits I n v e s t i g a t i o n and P r e p a r a t i o n o f C a s e s f o r T r i a l or P l e a i n T r i a l C o u r t Written Motion with Brief and Oral Argument (Excepting standard discovery orders) C a l e n d a r C o n f e r e n c e and A r r a i g n m e n t o n I n f o r m a t i o n ( F o r e a c h a p p e a r a n c e ) F i n a l C o n f e r e n c e ( F o r e a c h a p p e a r a n c e a s l o n g a s a d j o u r n m e n t n o t by d e f e n s e ) Walker Hearing One-half D a y or Less Fui l Day and Each D a y Thereafter One-ha1 f D a y o'r L e s s Evidentiary Hearing Full D a y and Each D a y Thereafter Plea Dismissal Wn n T r i a l D a y in T r i a l C o u r t o Forensic Hearing Witnesses Waived H e a r i n g ~ ~ l One-ha1 f D a y d , Hearing Held, F u l l D a y e-t t e n d a n c e in C o u r t for T r i a l P e r D a y o r F r a c t i o n T h e r e o f C a p i t a l C- ~ e ~ a Nan-capital C a s e s A t t e n d a n c e in C o u r t f o r S e n t e n c e Probation V i o l a t i o n and Extradition H e i r i n g APPEALS N o n - f r i v o l o u s M o t ion f o r New T r i a l T o g e t h e r W i t h M e m o r a n d u m o f L a w by T r i a l C o u n s e l A f t e r a J u r y o r Non-jury trial C 65.00 50. 00 2 5 .OO 115.00 6 5 .OO 35.00 2 5 .OO - - - - 135.00 65.00 50.00 40 .OO 6 5 .OO 1 3 5 .OO 65.00 1 3 5 .OO 85.00 35.00 50.00 1 3 5 .OO 2 5 0 .OO 1 6 5 .OO 6 5 .OO 6 5 .OO 1 0 0 .oo Transcript - E v e r y 400 p a g e s or m a j o r f r a c t i o n t h e r e o f o t h e r than guilty plea cases G u i l t y plea cases C l a i m of Appeal, Brief a n d Al l P r o c e e d i n g s Visit to Prison Facilities - Other t h a n gui l t y pl e a c a s e s Guilty plea cases W a y n e C o u n t y F a c i l iti e s C a m p P e l l s t o n and all U P F a c i l i t i e s Al l O t h e r s A p p e a l t o H i g h e r C o u r t f o r e a c h o n e - h a l f d a y s p e n t in t r i a l C o u r t A p p e a r a n c e at H a b e a s C o r p u s M I S C E L L A N E O U S FEE S C H E D U L E Show-ups Full D a y Standby Per Hour P s y c h i a t r i c C a s e s in w h i c h t h e M a x i m u m P e n a l t y is L i f e I m p r i s o n m e n t Interview and Written Evaluation A t t e n d a n c e in C o u r t Interview and Written Evaluation Other Experts A t t e n d a n c e in C o u r t Interpreters Per Day Half Day P A T E R N l TY Preparation Non-trial C o u r t A p p e a r a n c e - - 1 8 5 .OO 5 0 .oo - 1 2 5 .OO 115.00 60 .OO T r : 2 l 3L.- 4," ,rder No. 1983-1 S c h e d u l e "D" - Effective December 1, 1984 for S e r v i c e s R e n d e r e d A f t e r A b o v e D a t e - - I ev $ F E E S C H E D U L E FOR A S S I G N E D C O U N S E L Arraignment on Warrant Pre-exam - F' + 75.00 50.00 2 5 .OO 125.00 7 5 .OO 5 0 .OO 35.00 Jail Visit (one only) Office Visit Preliminary Examioation H e l d or W a i v e d Adjourned First Post E x a m J a i l Visit S e c o n d P o s t E x a m J ai l V i s i t C a p i t a l Cases: N o m o r e than t h r e e visits Non-capital Cases: N o m o r e than two visits I n v e s t i g a t i o n a n d P r e p a r a t i o n o f C a s e s f o r T r i a l o r P l e a in T r i a l C o u r t Written M o t i o n w i t h B r i e f and Oral Argument (Excepting standard discovery orders) Calendar Conference and Arraignment on Information (For each appearance) F i n a l C o n f e r e n c e ( F o r e a c h a p p e a r a n c e as l o n g as a d j o u r n m e n t n o t by d e f e n s e ) One-half D a y or L e s s Walker Hearing Ful 1 D a y and E a c h D a y T h e r e a f t e r One-half D a y or Less Evidentiary H e a r i n g F u l I D a y a n d E a c h D a y hereafter. W C b n T r i a l D a y in T r i a l C o u r t Plea - Dismissal Forensic H e a r i n g Wi t n e s s e s ' W a i v e d H e a r i n g H c l d l One-ha1 f D a y Hearing Held, Full D a y A t t e n d a n c e in C o u r t f o r T r i a l P e r D a y o r F r a c t i o n T h e r e o f Capital Cases Non-capi tal C a s e s .. A t t e n d a n c e in C o u r t f o r S e n t e n c e Probation V i o l a t i o n and Extradition Hearing APPEALS N o n - f r i v o l o u s M o t ion f o r N e w T r i a l T o g e t h e r Wi th M e m o r a n d u m o f L a w by T r i a l C o u n s e l A f t e r a J u r y o r Non-jury t r i a l - A - - - - 1 5 0 .OO 75.00 5 0 .OO 50.00 7 5 .OO 150.00 7 5 .OO 150.00 100 .oo 50.00 7 5 .OO 150 .oo 300.00 200.00 7 5 .OO 7 5 .OO Transcript - E v e r y 400 p a g e s or m a j o r f r a c t i o n t h e r e o f o t h e r than guilty plea cases G u i l ty p l e a c a s e s Claim of Appeal, Brief and Al l P r o c e e d i n g s Visit to P r i s o n Facilities - Other t h a n gui l ty p l e a c a s e s Guilty plea cases W a y n e County Facilities C a m p P e l l s t o n and all U P F a c i l i t i e s A1 I O t h e r s A p p e a l t o H i g h e r C o u r t fo; e a c h one-half d a y s p e n t in trial c o u r t A p p e a r a n c e at H a b e a s C o r p u s - M I S C E L L A N E O U S FEE SCHEDULE Show-ups Ful l D a y Standby Per Hour P s y c h i a t r i c C a s e s in w h i c h t h e M a x i m u m P e n a l t y is L i f e I m p r i s o n m e n t Interview and Written Evaluation A t t e n d a n c e in C o u r t Interview and W r i t t e n Evaluation Other Experts A t t e n d a n c e in C o u r t Interpreters Per Day Hal f Day P A T E R N l TY Preparation Ucn-tr i a l 5 0 .OO 3 0 0 .OO 150.00 2 0 0 .OO 1 5 0 .OO 150.00 7 5 .OO 1 5 0 .OO 7 5 .OO Court 9A~gearancc r Arraignment on Warrant Pre-exam for Services fiendered After Above Date /*- Jail Visit (one only) Office Visit Preliminary Exanination Held or Uaived Adjourned first Post Exam Jail Visit Second Post Exam Jail Visit Capital Cases: No more than two visits Non-capital cases: No more than one visit Investigation and Preparation of Cases for Trial or Plea in Trial Court Gritten Motion with Brief and Oral Argument (Excepting standard discovery orders) Calendar Conference and Arraigment on Information (For each appearance) Final Conference (For each appearance as long as adjournment not by defense) One-half Day or Less Walker Bearing Full Day and Each Day Thereafter Evidentiary Bearing One-half Day or Less Full Day and Each Day Thereafter Plea - Dismissal - "ROC" on Trial Day in Trial Court Forensic Hearing Witnesses Waived Hearing Held, One-half Day Hearine Held, Full Dav Attendance in Court for Trial Per Dav or Fraction Thereof Attendance in Court for Sentence Probation Violation and Extradition hear in^ - 5 75 - 50 25 125 - 75 50 35 150. 75. 50 50. 75. 150. 75. 150. 150. 50. 75. 150. 150. - - - 75. 75. 125. APPEALS Ron-frivolous Motion for New Trial Together With Me~orandur;: Law of by Trial Counsel After a Jury or Kon-jury Trial Transcript - Every 400 pages or najor fraction thereof other than guilty plea cases Guilty plet cases Clairz of Appeal, Erief and All Proceedings Visit to Prison Facilities - Other than guilty plea cases Guilty plea cases Kayne County Facilities Gun? Pellston and all UP Facilities All Others Agpea! to Bigher Court for each one-half day spent in trial court Appearance at Habeas Corpus !lSCELL:-h;EOUS - Shou-u?s Full Day Standby fer Hour Penalty is Life Inprisonnent Fsychiatric Cases in vhich the R a x i ~ w , Interview and Written Evaluation Attendance in Court r. VLhe: txperts intervies and Kritten Evaluation Xttendznce in Court Per Day in:er?reters Ealf Dav c - FEE SCFrDULE ' - 50. 300. 150. 200. 150. 150.: 75. - ?;.TEF2;IT . Preparation Kcn- trial Court b.?pezrance 7 r i ~ lper day 150.. 75.. 150.. .. STAT2 OF MICEIGAN THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT AND TBE mCCZ3'S =:.TXT EXlR TBE CITY OF DETROIT JOINT -=RATnlE Om= 1988-2 ;..,e zttac:~ed fee Schedule G representing fees for asoign~ez c ~ i a s r l .is adopled for all vouchers submitted after July 1, 1998, Z:;ice A*.i=istxatLve Order 1988-1 including Schedule F 6. H. is sek asbSz :iad rsplaced by this Order and Schedule G. Counsel a : c n e g : S t d for inC4gent defendants may make no exgendituru, other than far sukpcena fees, for which he or she expects reix3uzac~ante : c l t upon prbr apsroval and order of the :za> trial judge an moeisn for goad cause show.. In any case in wkich nore than one criminal offense is charged, payment shal.1 be ;zade for only the charge carrying the greatest gotentia1 tenit of imprisor~nent . Counsel is reqaired ,l-o cmnult with the defendant prior if to the prelimicary exam. S~nsepl:c~~tly, the defendant is in jail counsel must attach to t3c fee w x e h ~ ~ r evidence of a j a i l visit; r.t and if the defendant is not in jail, ccmsel : d z attach to the fee voucher an execuzed form z:silahle Zrom the office of the Circuit Court Administrrtor or Recorder's Court Administrator verifying that counsel has r i c , i h the defendrnt prior to the preliminary te-wt exam. Failure to attach this document to the voucher will result in a $75.00 deducti~,~ the appropriate fixad fee. from . . IR a1.L eases.,* ccunrsi .may geti.tion the Chief Judge for the payment of ertracrdinary fees. All petit.ions fcr extraordinary af a fees must:'include ..aq,~-;~alv;is l l assigned cases for the . . previous one years.. . .:.r.... . : . DATED: June 2 7 , 1988 EXECUTIVE CHIEF JUDGE SCEEDULE G (For vouchers submitted on or afcer above date) CRIMINAL OFFENSE CASES - EPPeCTNE JULY 1, 1988 IN TEZ TXIAL COURT CATEGORY 24 MONTH MAX 36 MONTH MAX 48 MONTH MAX 60 MONTH MAX 84 MONTH MAX ' 120 MONTH MAX - '" 168 MONTH MAX ' 180 MONTH MAX 240 MONTH MAX 3 0 LIFE (except-MURDER I1 I 6 11) The fixed fee rates in the above table will be paid in all cases, except under those circumstances listed below. . EXCEPTIONS I. Multiple Cases with Same Defendant: 100% of fixed fee-for case with most serious charge 50% of fixed fee for each other case Case Dismissed at Ewm Due to Complainant's Failure to Appear: Case Where Capias Warrant is Issued: 10% of fixed fee Before preliminary exam 20% After exam After A01 30% After final conference 40% After disposition, 90% before sentence 2. 5100.00 3. 4. Attorney Replaced by Retained Counsel: After preliminary exam - 20% of fixed fee After A01 - 30% After final conference - - 40% 5 .' Diversion: Before preliminary exam After exam paid as disposition - 5100.00 6. Probation Violation or Extradition Hearing: Diversions Pleas 7. Welfare Fraud: .- - for a grouping of 25 defendants for a grouping of 5 defendants If. ACTIVITY A TXE AP?ZLLAE LEVEL T Non-frivolous Motion for New Trial Together with Memorandum of Law by Trial Counsel After a Jury or Non-jury Trial: Transcript: Every 400 pages or major fraction thereof other than guilty plea cases Guilty plea cases Claim of Appeal Brief and All Proceedings: Other than guilty plea cases Guilty plea cases Visit to Prison Facilities: Wayne County facilities Camp Pellston and all UP facilities All others Appeal to Higher Courts for Each One-half Day Spent in Trial Court: Appearance at Habeas Corpus: 111. MISCELLANEOUS ACTIVITY Full day standby Per .hour Psychiatric Cases in Which the Maximum Penalty is Life Imprisonment: Interview and written evaluation Attendance in court Other Experts: Interpreters: Interview and written evaluation Attendance in court Per day Half day 75.00 400.00 200.00 75 .OO 50.00 PATE-WITY CASE A C T M T Y Preparation, Nan-trial Court Appearance(s1, Trials and All Other Trial Court Proceedings: , V. SPOUSE ABUSE CASHS Preparation, Non-trial Court Appearance(s1, Trials and All Other Trial Court Proceedings: WAYNE COUNTY CRIMINAL DEFENSE BAR ASSOCIATION PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE Crime Class A, All Homicides and CSC 1 & 3 Event Preparation Time Event Time Total Time Hourly Rate Proposed Fee Current Fee Preliminary Exam AOL Plea Pre-Exam Bond Hearing Competency Hearing Docket Conference Investigation & Prep Final Conference Sentence Calendar Conf. Pre-Trial Conf Motion (No Testimony) Motion (With Testimony) Motion (With Testimony/hll day) Jail Visits Trial Preparation (Jury) Trial Preparation (Bench) Trial Full Day Trial Half Day Probation Violation: Plea and Sentence Same Appearance Plea and Sentence Separate Appearance Plea Half Day Bench Trial Three Day Jury Trial 3.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 3.O 1.5 1.5 0.0 20.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 3.5 2.0 0.0 2.0 1.o 1.o 2.0 0.0 2.5 2.0 1.o 1.o 2.0 3 .o 6.0 1.o 0.0 0.0 7.0 4.0 6.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.o 1.o 2.0 0.0 2.5 3.5 1.o 1.o 5.o 4.5 7.5 1.o 20.0 12.0 9.0 6.0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 650 200 200 200 100 100 200 0 250 350 100 100 500 450 750 100 2000 1200 900 600 100 175 Proposed Fee 1400 3350 6250 250 100 260 50 0 0 0 270 100 140 80 80 140 100 200 50 0 0 420 210 Current Fee 1020 1150 2200 Crime Classes B, C, D, and any other offense requiring mandatory MDOC sentence Preparation Event Event Time Total Time Hourly Rate Proposed Fee Current Fee Preliminary Exam AOL Plea Pre-Exam Bond Hearing Competency Hearing Docket Conference Investigation & Prep Final Conference Sentence Calendar Conf. Pre-Trial Conf Motion (No Testimony) Motion (With Testimony) Motion (With Testimony/hll day) Jail Visits Trial Preparation (Jury) Trial Preparation (Bench) Trial Full Day Trial Half Day Probation Violation: Plea and Sentence Same Appearance Plea and Sentence Separate Appearance Plea Half Day Bench Trial Three Day Jury Trial 3.5 5.5 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 100 175 Proposed Fee 1063 2381 4506 Current Fee 800 880 1690 Crime Classes E, F, G , H Event Preparation Time Event Time Total Time Hourly Rate Proposed Fee Current Fee Preliminary Exam AOL Plea Pre-Exam Bond Hearing Competency Hearing Docket Conference Investigation & Prep Final Conference Sentence Calendar Conf. Pre-Trial Conf Motion (No Testimony) Motion (With Testimony) Motion (With Testimony/full day) Jail Visits Trial Preparation (Jury) Trial Preparation (Bench) Trial Full Day Trial Half Day Probation Violation: Plea and Sentence Same Appearance Plea and Sentence Separate Appearance Plea Half Day Bench Trial Three Day Jury Trial 1.o 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 2.5 1.5 1.5 0.0 8.0 8.0 1.o 1.o 3. O 4.0 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 300 225 150 150 75 75 150 0 188 188 75 75 338 338 563 75 600 450 600 375 100 175 Proposed Fee 863 1801 3378 110 50 140 50 0 0 0 140 50 70 50 50 70 80 160 50 0 0 220 110 75 75 Current Fee 510 580 1130