M. JAMES JENKINS, PETITIONER,
v.
ESCAMBIA COUNTY, FLORIDA, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Court-appointed attorney Jenkins challenged an order reducing his fee award for representing a first-degree murder defendant. The court found the trial judge improperly cut the hours and fee without factual or legal justification, resulting in an unreasonably low hourly rate.
The trial court's fee reduction order was improper and quashed. The order must be remanded for determination of a reasonable fee based on established standards, as the court's reduction had no foundation in fact or law and resulted in unjustifiably inadequate compensation.
[1] An appeal challenging an order awarding attorney's fees to court-appointed counsel is properly treated as a petition for certiorari.
[2] A trial court may not reduce the out-of-court hours of court-appointed counsel without evidence supporting the reduction.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the extensive pretrial preparation by petitioner would still have to be done on behalf of his own client. That the court was satisfied with Jenkins' representation is evident by the court's concluding remarks to him”
Establishes that Jenkins' work was necessary regardless of co-counsel's involvement and that the trial court itself recognized the quality of his representation
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJenkins served as court-appointed counsel for a defendant charged with first-degree murder and four other counts. Jenkins expended approximately 210 h…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Petition For Certiorari cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Jenkins, the court-appointed attorney for a defendant charged with first degree murder and four other offenses, appeals an order awarding him a fee for his services. The proper vehicle for challenging an order awarding attorney’s fees to court-appointed counsel is a petition for certiorari, Russell v. County of Escambia, 570 So. 2d 991 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), and thus this appeal will be treated as a petition for certiorari. The petition is granted.
Counsel expended approximately 210 hours representing the defendant in this case. The county did not contest the reasonableness of the time spent. Counsel introduced expert evidence from other attorneys that $8,943.60 was a reasonable fee for his services in representing the defendant. Nevertheless, the trial judge cut Jenkins’ out-of-court hours from approximately 180 to 80 hours and awarded him a fee of $4,735.60. No evidence was introduced which supported this cut. Apparently it was made because the trial court felt that private counsel representing a code-fendant in this criminal episode caused Jenkins to bear a disproportionate share of the defense representation, and that the county should not be saddled with having to bear a greater financial burden because private counsel elected to be less involved than Jenkins. This attempted justification advanced by the trial judge has no foundation in fact or law since it is obvious, as even the County’s brief correctly recognizes, that whether or not co-counsel effectively participated in the representation of his client, the extensive pretrial preparation by petitioner would still have to be done on behalf of his own client. That the court was satisfied with Jenkins’ representation is evident by the court’s concluding remarks to him:
The court expresses its sincere gratitude to you for the very able job you did on Mr. Johnson’s [the defendant] behalf. I know that’s not going to make up the extra two or three thousand dollars that you have been deprived of, but I do appreciate your efforts and commend you.
The net effect of the trial court’s order was to compensate counsel at the rate of $22.27 per hour for his able representation.
The trial court’s order is quashed and the case is remanded for a determination of a reasonable fee within the parameters outlined in White v. Board of County Commissioners of Pinellas County, 537 So. 2d 1376 (Fla.1989), and Makemson v. Martin County, 491 So. 2d 1109 (Fla.1989), cert. denied, Martin County, Florida v. Mak- emson, 479 U.S. 1043, 107 S.Ct. 908, 93 L.Ed.2d 857 (1987).
PETITION GRANTED.
ERVIN, SMITH and BARFIELD, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sheppard & White, P.A. v. City OF Jacksonville, 827 So. 2d 925 (Fla. 2002)…Sheppard & White, 751 So. 2d at 733. A writ of certiorari is the proper vehicle for challenging an award of attorney’s fees to court-appointed counsel. See, e.g., Bobbitt v. State, 726 So. 2d 848, 851 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999); Jenkins v. Escambia County, 614 So. 2d 1207, 1207 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). .The district court indicated the hourly rate as $50 in its certified question because during the pendency of the petitioner's proceedings before it, the chief judge of the Fourth Judicial Circuit increased the hourly com…
-
Escambia Cnty. v. F.T. Ratchford & The State of Fla., 650 So. 2d 154 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)…PER CURIAM. This cause is before us on Escambia County’s petition for writ of certiorari from the trial court’s order awarding $20,202.60 in costs and attorney fees to court-appointed defender Ratchford. See Jenkins v. Escambia County, 614 So. 2d 1207 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993) (providing that the proper vehicle for challenging an order awarding attorney fees to court-appointed counsel is a petition for certiorari). In granting the award, the trial court departed from the essential requirements of the l…
-
Sheppard & White, P.A. v. The City OF Jacksonville, 751 So. 2d 731 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…ioner to compensate co-counsel Baldwin as agreed between them. Standard of Review A petition for writ of certiorari is the proper vehicle for challenging an order awarding attorney’s fees to court-appointed counsel. See Jenkins v. Escambia County, 614 So. 2d 1207 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). In exercising our certiorari jurisdiction, our standard of review is limited to determining whether the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law. See Escambia County v. Ratchford, 650 So. 2d 154, 155 (Fla. 1st…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Makemson v. Martin Cnty., 491 So. 2d 1109 (Fla. 1986)
- White v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs of Pinellas Cnty., 537 So. 2d 1376 (Fla. 1989)
- Bowman v. United States, 479 U.S. 1043 (U.S. 1987)
- Williams v. Marlboro State Hosp., 479 U.S. 1043 (U.S. 1987)
- Russell v. Cnty. OF Escambia, 570 So. 2d 991 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)