98911, People v. Baez

GRANICH: I anticipate returning and trying this casewhen necessary, Judge, but, what I had anticipated was Mr.Theis would carry on the case while I was out of town andthen I would be returning to try the case.THE COURT: You need to put something in writing forme, Counsel, when you’ll be gone, because we’ll havesubstitute counsel rather than two attorneys on this case.GRANICH: All right.THE COURT: *** I need it in writing what you intend todo, when you intend to leave. If you can get that to the Stateby the 16th, I can review it.* * *The statute says–Supreme Court rules talk about a certainnumber of attorneys. I don’t know that it speaks to the countypaying for two and maybe a private attorney and a PublicDefender.”The case was continued to May 22, 2001. On that date, the courtreviewed the history of the case on the record and then indicated thatit had discussed the appointment of Theis with the parties inchambers:“I informed Mr. Granich and the state’s attorney in mychambers that I don’t think that this is something that legallyI can do because there is really no basis for appointing privatecounsel on Mr. Baez’s case.Counsel represented to me I think a month or two ago thatMr. Baez paid him less than five thousand dollars on a capitalmurder case. On a capital murder case I cannot imaginecounsel being able to proceed on the case with *** less than50 thousand dollars, and because of that it is clear if Mr. Baezcan’t pay more than five thousand dollars that he cannotafford private counsel.I cannot give him private counsel just because he wantsprivate counsel. There has to be a reason for appointment.There are excellent attorneys in the public defenders murdertask force and one of those attorneys will be appointed torepresent Mr. Baez.-10-