Appealing a case isn’t cheap. However, we’ve got some good news for individuals wanting to appeal! The State Supreme Court of Washington ruled on October 30 that attorney fees awarded to a person who successfully appeals a ruling by an administrative agency will triple.

The case came about when Kathie Costanich, a foster parent whose license was revoked by the state Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS), appealed the revocation in Superior Court. Awarded $25,000 in attorney fees, the max allowed by law but only a fraction of the $160,000 billed by attorneys, Costanich was eventually awarded $46,239 for fees by the state Court of Appeals.

DSHS didn’t like that at all. Claiming that the state Equal Access to Justice Act capped attorney fee awards at $25,000 for all stages of judicial review, the Supreme Court ruled that the cap is $25,000 each for the trial, the appellate level and the Supreme Court.

Popularity: 2% [?]

After a teen was convicted of murder, Sister Janet Harris fought to get him released from jail. However, lawyer after lawyer turned her away until she found Latham & Watkins. It all began many years ago when police charged gang member Mario Rocha with two separate shootings outside Los Angeles. One victim died and the other was badly wounded.

Sister Janet met Rocha in Juvenile Hall when she was there, running her creative writing program. She said she knew he was innocent and pushed to have someone take over Rocha’s case. Initially, it seemed hopeless but after the firm had the teenager take a lie detector test to ensure that they were, in fact, fighting for an innocent kid, they hired a private investigator to find missing witnesses. Sure enough, several people revealed that on the night of the shootings, everyone was gathered at a party and Rocha was nowhere near the gun fire.

After gathering new evidence, a judge listened to the lawyers and ruled that Rocha had to be re-charged. He was held on $1 million bond. In 2006, after the firm raised money to get him released, Rocha walked out of prison. Latham then hired an expert criminal attorney, Michael Adelson, to prepare his trial. Talking about having Rocha plead guilty to a lesser charge in order to secure his release on a sentence of time served, Rocha said no way!

Last Tuesday, all the charges were dropped against him.

Popularity: 2% [?]

Last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved, without amendment, a bill to allow convicted military members to petition the U.S. Supreme Court for review of their cases even if the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) has denied review or a petition for extraordinary relief.

 Going to the full Senate, the bill, which is considered an unfair situation by the American Bar Association, the Military Officers Association of America and others, is about to change course after two decades.

Popularity: 2% [?]

Once upon a time in New York, a black man named John White was found guilty of fatally shooting a white teen. However, in December, 2007, one of the jurors came out of the courtroom closet, so to speak, stating that he helped convict the man for shooting and killing the boy but felt pressured by other jurors and the judge to change his vote to guilty during a deliberating session.

Convicting White (54) of second-degree manslaughter in the August 2006 shooting of 17-year-old Daniel Cicciaro, Jr., the man faces a prison term of five to 15 years and remains free on bail. Defense attorneys argued that White feared a “lynch mob” had come to attack his family when a group of white teens came to White’s house to confront his son.

Juror Francois Larche said that during a long weekend where the jurors were stuck in a room trying to come to a decision, he endured a lot of “pressure” by fellow jurors and the judge to close this case and go home.

“I thought about my family and the families of the other jurors,” Larche said. “It was not worth it in the end.”

Jury forewoman Maureen Steigerwald denied that the judge, a 12-hour deliberating session on Saturday — the fourth day of deliberations — or the holidays played a role in the jury’s decision.

However, if one juror is feeling badly about his final decision, this brings up a big problem. Although this case was closed (until the appeal) several months ago, the juror’s statement should still be mentioned today. With a man’s life at stake, better instructions and possibly a time limitation (that exclude weekends and offer break periods) may need to be considered. After all, sending someone to prison for many years to wrap up a case isn’t a fair deal. But then again, who ever said the law was always fair?

Popularity: 7% [?]