MacIas

Jorge Pelayo Macias appeals a judgment denying a petition for writ of mandate to compel the Imperial County Municipal Court (Mu *571 nicipal Court) to furnish counseling attorneys at arraignment and upon entry of plea to indigent persons charged with crimes which could result in confinement. The Municipal Court appeals from so much of the judgment which finds the filing and hearing on the writ conferred a substantial public benefit and awards $1,000 attorney fees and $288.99 costs to Macias’ counsel. Macias does not appeal denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus based on the same grounds as urged in his petition to compel the presence of counseling attorneys at arraignment.

I

June 15, 1984, lawyer John W. Breeze addressed a letter to seven persons, including the four judges 1 of the Municipal Court, the county counsel, the public defender and another unidentified person. Citing our opinion in Rhyne v. Municipal Court (1980) 113 Cal.App.3d 807 [ 170 Cal.Rptr. 312 ], Breeze stated he believed the law required “misdemeanor defendants be furnished with a counseling attorney prior to and during their arraignment” if the charged offense could result in confinement;…

I concur in the majority opinion except for part V; as to the denial of attorney fees, I dissent.

The trial court obtained an admission from the district attorney that the misdemeanor arraignment proceedings were discussed in a conference between the parties to the writ proceeding and the presiding judge of the Imperial County Municipal Court (Municipal Court). This conference was at the suggestion of the trial court as a direct result of this writ proceeding. The conference resulted in constructive accomplishments, i.e., correction of the major objections to the Municipal Court arraignment proceedings. The trial court conferred with the parties off the record and was apprised of the nature of the changes and, after receiving facts which, unfortunately, it did not articulate on the record, evaluated the public benefit as justifying a $1,000 attorney fee plus deposition costs. The record substantially supports the award of fees and costs.

In addition, Judge Wien’s order specifically sets forth his findings which are supported by the record; that following the conference ordered as a result of the writ proceedings, the Municipal Court modified its advisement procedures in a manner…

Jorge Pelayo Macias appeals a judgment denying a petition for writ of mandate to compel the Imperial County Municipal Court (Municipal Court) to furnish counseling attorneys at arraignment and upon entry of plea to indigent persons charged with crimes which could result in confinement. The Municipal Court appeals from so much of the judgment which finds the filing and hearing on the writ conferred a substantial public benefit and awards $1,000 attorney fees and $288.99 costs to Macias' counsel. Macias does not appeal denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus based on the same grounds as urged in his petition to compel the presence of counseling attorneys at arraignment.

June 15, 1984, lawyer John W. Breeze addressed a letter to seven persons, including the four judges [1] of the Municipal Court, the county counsel, the public defender and another unidentified person. Citing our opinion in Rhyne v. Municipal Court (1980) 113 Cal. App.3d 807 [ 170 Cal. Rptr. 312 ], Breeze stated he believed the law required "misdemeanor defendants be furnished with a counseling attorney prior to and during their arraignment" if the charged offense could result in…