Opinion ID: 1263060
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: proposed scheme of dichotomized compensation for private practitioners whose services are requisitioned for the defense of indigent criminal defendants

Text: I would not reward lawyers for discharging their public-duty service with that quantum of compensation which equals salaries drawn by the district attorneys/public defenders and their assistants. Rather, I would restrict legislative power to set rates for lawyers' public service work to no more than the Bar-prescribed quantum of annual public-duty maximum. [36] Once an individual practitioner has performed all that may constitute the permissibly claimed public service maximum, all work beyond that maximum  whether for the benefit of the State in criminal defense or for the benefit of some other governmental entity  should be paid at its fair market value. [37] I would hence adopt a dichotomized scheme of compensation for lawyers assigned to perform public service. For the required public service work a lawyer would be compensated at the statutory rate; but when that duty is done, excess services would qualify as property whose taking for public use must be compensated at fair market value, lest there be an expropriation in the constitutional sense. [38] Lawyers appointed from the private sector must also be compensated for all out-of-pocket expenses. [39] Volunteers who request public service assignments in excess of the Bar-established maximum would be compensated at the state-authorized rate.