United States v. La Vance Edwards

Good Law
587 F.2d 29
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 1, 197878-1379California740 words

Opinion

Opinion

This appeal concerns a claim for $61.33 by defense counsel, Howard W. Gillingham, for the services of an investigator.

In the criminal case above captioned, Gill-ingham, appointed as defense attorney under the Criminal Justice Plan, applied on December 30, 1976 for the appointment of an investigator pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3006A. This was just before the New Year weekend. Without waiting for the court to act, Gillingham authorized a law student to undertake investigative work in the case. The application was denied by the court on January 3, 1977.

Thereafter, the criminal case above captioned went to a jury trial, and the jury was unable to agree as to the guilt or innocence of the supposed appellant, La Vance Edwards.

On February 3, 1977, the court declared a mistrial, and on February 7, 1977, dismissed the criminal charge against Edwards and exonerated his bond.

On February 7, 1977, Gillingham filed a supplemental affidavit, and on the same date renewed his previous application for the appointment of an investigator. The applications were denied by the trial court.

On February 14, 1977, there was filed in behalf of the supposed appellant, La Vance Edwards, a notice of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.