August 12, 2004
Second Thoughts in California's Fifth District
As discussed in this effective law.com article, California's Fifth Appellate District Court of Appeal yesterday substantially modified the standing order it entered last week (background here), which stated that the court would "no longer compensate appointed counsel for research or briefing directed to any issue presented by Blakely v. Washington." The Fifth District's modified order, which has somewhat mollified defense counsel concerned about safeguarding their client's rights and can be accessed here, states:
Pending opinions by the California Supreme Court in People v. Towne (review granted Jul. 14, 2004, S125677), and People v. Black (review granted Jul. 28, 2004, S126182), if appellate counsel wishes to raise any issue presented by Blakely v. Washington (2004), he or she may file a letter consistent in form with the attached “Supplemental Argument Pursuant to Standing Order No. 04-1,” thereby preserving the issues for further state and federal review. Counsel need not file an application for leave to file the supplemental statement....
The purpose of this order is to ensure that the subject issues will be raised and preserved for review in an efficient manner.
August 12, 2004 at 09:40 PM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Second Thoughts in California's Fifth District:
Posted by: laptop battery | Oct 14, 2008 5:31:46 AM