Pedlow

Petitioner seeks a writ of mandate to compel respondent court to order payment of $85,750 as reasonable compensation for his services as an attorney. Petitioner was appointed by respondent to represent an indigent defendant in a capital case. He alleges that respondent has abused its discretion by ordering that a substantially lower sum ($38,470) be paid to him and that his further attempts to negotiate with respondent have been fruitless.

Earlier, this court summarily denied this petition because of petitioner’s failure to offer any documentation or other record in support of the conclusionary allegations of his petition.

By its order directing that an alternative writ be issued, the California Supreme Court has determined that, in the ordinary course of law, petitioner is without an adequate remedy. (Payne v. Superior Court *370 (1976) 17 Cal.3d 908, 925 [ 132 Cal.Rptr. 405 , 553 P.2d 565 ]; 5 Wit-kin, Cal. Procedure (2d ed. 1971) Extraordinary Writs, § 94, p. 3870.) Nevertheless, such an order does not deprive a Court of Appeal of its discretion to determine whether the petition is sufficient. (Krueger v. Superior Court (1979) 89 Cal.App.3d 934, 936 [ 152 Cal.Rptr.…

I dissent.

It appears that petitioner has not specifically met his pleading burden. Perhaps the records of the proceedings held below were not sufficient or ready. Nonetheless, it appears that the sum designated by the lower court is insufficient as payment for the services rendered by petitioner. I would, therefore, send the pleadings back for a more explicit and complete record.

A petition for a rehearing was denied December 19, 1980, and petitioner’s application for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied January 28, 1981.

Petitioner seeks a writ of mandate to compel respondent court to order payment of $85,750 as reasonable compensation for his services as an attorney. Petitioner was appointed by respondent to represent an indigent defendant in a capital case. He alleges that respondent has abused its discretion by ordering that a substantially lower sum ($38,470) be paid to him and that his further attempts to negotiate with respondent have been fruitless.

Earlier, this court summarily denied this petition because of petitioner's failure to offer any documentation or other record in support of the conclusionary allegations of his petition.

By its order directing that an alternative writ be issued, the California Supreme Court has determined that, in the ordinary course of law, petitioner is without an adequate remedy. ( Payne v. Superior Court (1976) 17 Cal.3d 908, 925 [ 132 Cal. Rptr. 405 , 553 P.2d 565 ]; 5 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (2d ed. 1971) Extraordinary Writs, § 94, p. 3870.) Nevertheless, such an order does not deprive a Court of Appeal of its discretion to determine whether the petition is sufficient. ( Krueger v. Superior Court (1979) 89 Cal. App.3d 934, 936 [ 152…