Dade County v. Strauss

Citation246 So.2d 137
Decision Date16 March 1971
Docket NumberNo. 70-1139,70-1139
PartiesDADE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Petitioner, v. Ronald I. STRAUSS, Respondent.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Thomas C. Britton, County Atty., and Gary S. Brooks and Joseph D. Komansky, Asst. County Attys., for petitioner.

Ronald I. Strauss, in pro. per.

Becker, Kimler & Entin, Miami, for Florida Criminal Defense Attorneys' Assn., as amicus curiae.

Before PEARSON, C. J., HENDRY, J., and VANN, HAROLD R., Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Dade County has instituted this appeal by petitioning for a common law writ of certiorari to review an ex parte order directed against its treasury under the following facts and circumstances.

The said order was entered by the Honorable Carling Stedman, Judge of the Criminal Court of Record, in and for Dade County. The order directs the Board of County Commissioners to pay the sum of Ten Thousand ($10,000.00) Dollars to Ronald I. Strauss, appointed Special Assistant Public Defender, for payment of attorney's fees in the case of State of Florida v. Charles Celona, Case No. 70-2288, in the Criminal Court of Record.

Mr. Strauss had represented the same defendant, Charles Celona, in two previous criminal cases, State v. Celona, No. 69-3665, and State v. Celona, No. 70-225.

The subject suit, State v. Celona, No. 70-2288, was instituted on March 11, 1970, by the filing of an information against Charles Celona on charges of robbery and conspiracy to commit robbery.

On March 19, 1970, Mr. Celona filed an affidavit of insolvency, and after a hearing, the Criminal Court Judge, Carling Stedman, declared Mr. Celona insolvent and appointed the Public Defender as counsel for him.

At the insolvency proceeding, the Court allowed the Public Defender to withdraw and appointed Mr. Strauss, Special Assistant Public Defender. The transcript of the insolvency proceeding revealed that Mr. Celona was represented by Mr. Strauss at the proceeding. Mr. Strauss was chosen by Mr. Celona and voluntarily undertook to represent him as Special Assistant Public Defender; and that all parties were aware at the time of appointment that the amount of the fee was 'limited' and would not amount to 'what his (Mr. Strauss') services would be worth.'

Soon after, on May 4, 1970, Mr. Strauss moved for an Order clarifying the payment of costs. The Court entered an Order on May 14, 1970, directing that all subpoenas be issued and served and copies of all documents of record supplied to counsel without costs or fees.

During the course of the criminal proceedings, Mr. Strauss made numerous motions for the payment of various costs. The Court, in turn, issued orders awarding at least $3,885 in costs. On October 14, 1970, Mr. Strauss filed a motion with accompanying affidavits and memorandum of law for attorneys' fees. On October 20, 1970, the Court entered the order in question, awarding to Mr. Strauss $10,000.00 in attorneys' fees.

Although the Order in question directs the Board of County Commissioners to pay attorneys' fees, the Board was not a party to the criminal action, never received service or any notice of the motion for attorneys' fees, never received any notice of any hearings on said motion, and never was afforded any opportunity to contest the award. Rather, the order was entered ex parte against a body not party to the suit.

The award of attorneys' fees was made pursuant to Sec. 27.53(2), Florida Statutes, F.S.A., which reads as follows:

'In addition, any member of the bar in good standing may be appointed by the court or may register his or her availability to the public defender of each judicial circuit for acceptance of special assignments without salary to represent insolvent defendants. Such persons shall be listed and referred to as special assistant public defenders and be paid a fee; such fee shall be fixed by the trial judge and shall be paid in the same manner as counsel fees are paid in capital cases or as otherwise provided by law. In addition, defense counsel may be assigned and paid pursuant to any existing or future local act or general act of local application.'

Said section directs that attorneys' fees shall be paid in the same manner as those paid in capital cases, which manner is controlled by Sec. 909.21, Florida Statutes, F.S.A. That section is set out in full below:

'909.21 Appointment of counsel in capital cases; appeals from judgments imposing the death penalty.--

'(1) In all capital cases where the defendant is insolvent, the judge shall appoint such counsel for the defendant as he shall deem necessary, and shall allow such compensation and costs for investigation and preparation of the case for trial as he may deem reasonable, such sum to be paid by the county in which the crime was committed. Counsel, so appointed, shall, in the event of conviction and sentence of death, appeal the case to the supreme court and prosecute said appeal to its final conclusion with diligence; and until the supreme court has disposed of the appeal, no compensation shall be allowed to such counsel. If counsel first appointed is unable for any reason to perfect and prosecute the appeal, the court shall, relieve him from such duty, but shall appoint other counsel for such purpose. When counsel so appointed by the court, in capital cases, completes the duties imposed by this section, such counsel shall file a written report as to the duties performed by him and apply for discharge by the court.

'(2) The compensation of counsel for the defendant, at the trial, shall not exceed seven hundred fifty dollars ($750.00) unless the court appoints two (2) or more counsel in which case the compensation shall not exceed a total of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00); and the compensation of defendant's counsel on appeal shall not exceed five hundred dollars ($500.00) additional. The cost of investigation and preparation of the case for trial shall not exceed two hundred fifty dollars ($250.00).

'(3) In the event of a second trial of the same cause, the attorney appointed to represent the indigent defendant shall be entitled to additional compensation in an amount not to exceed one-half of the attorney's fee awarded for the defense of the first trial.

'As amended Laws 1955, c. 29656, sec. 1; Laws 1967, c. 67-502, sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1967.'

Sub-section (2) of the above statute permits the award of attorneys' fees to a single attorney who has not taken an appeal in a criminal case to $750, and limits the cost of the investigation and preparation of the case for trial to $250. Petitioner claims that the award here for attorneys' fees in the amount of $10,000 was without authority, excessive and void. However, petitioner does not challenge, and therefore does not appeal from the award of costs in the amount of $3,885.

In brief summary, the following statutes are involved in the case sub judice:

The 1967 Florida Statute 909.21, F.S.A. regulates the appointment and compensation of counsel for an indigent criminal defendant in capital cases and provides for the cost of investigation and preparation of the case for trial.

The said 1967 statute placed an upper limit of $750 for the compensation of said counsel and also an upper limit of $250 for the cost of investigation and preparation of the case for trial.

However, the new Statute 909.21, under Ch. 70-339, effective January 1, 1971, kept the limit on attorneys' fees but removed the $250 limitation as to costs.

Florida Statute 27.53, F.S.A. also provides for indigent criminal defense, but only in non-capital cases. It is noted...

To continue reading

Request your trial
25 cases
  • Marion County v. Johnson
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • September 5, 1991
    ...Wakulla County v. Davis, 395 So.2d 540 (Fla.1981); Broward County v. Wright, 420 So.2d 401 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Dade County v. Strauss, 246 So.2d 137 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971), cert. denied, 253 So.2d 864 (Fla.1971), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 924, 92 S.Ct. 1793, 32 L.Ed.2d 125 (1972). The supreme cou......
  • Weisman v. Justice Admin. Comm'n
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • May 4, 2022
    ...or attorney fee claim, or for a county to contest the claim that by law it would have to pay if awarded. See Dade County v. Strauss , 246 So. 2d 137, 140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971) (relying on Dade County v. Carr to approve county's petition for certiorari review regarding an order for fees that it......
  • Mackenzie v. Hillsborough County
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • December 12, 1973
    ...whether it is reviewable by appeal or by certiorari, as was done in Lunetto v. State, Fla.App.2d 1973, 274 So.2d 251; Dade County v. Strauss, Fla.App.3d 1971, 246 So.2d 137; and Dade County v. Carr, Fla.App.3d 1970, 231 So.2d 'Our view is that the constitutional question involved is one com......
  • Dade County v. Baker
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • September 12, 1978
    ...the County has standing to bring a petition for writ of certiorari to review the order effecting the transfer. Cf. Dade County v. Strauss, 246 So.2d 137 (Fla.3d DCA 1971); and Dade County v. Carr, 231 So.2d 844 (Fla.3d DCA 1970). The gist of the present petition is that although the circuit......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT