Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
LEGISLATURE SPURNED BY GOVERNOR’S QUIET DEAL WITH COURTS Call it Sacramento’s version of a political love triangle: Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Chief Justice Ronald George have developed a chummy budget relationship this year, leaving the Legislature feeling rather jilted. In addition to lavishing the judiciary with high-profile money for new judges and conservatorship reforms, the administration quietly gave George an equally coveted gift in its 2007-08 budget proposal: an SAL extension. And lawmakers aren’t thrilled about it. SAL, or the state appropriations limit, is a spending formula that automatically boosts the judiciary’s trial court budget every year. Court leaders like SAL because they don’t have to demonstrate a need for the budget increase. As the state-allocated funding has risen annually � an average of 5 percent since 2000 � judiciary executives have gotten to decide how it’s spent. Last year, the governor tried to extend the SAL beyond just the trial courts, arguing that as a separate and co-equal branch of government the entire judiciary should have the power to budget as it sees fit. The Legislature nixed that $17.9 million proposal, however, saying the Supreme Court, appellate courts and other nontrial court functions don’t need the automatic spending increases. This year, the Schwarzenegger administration didn’t ask the Legislature; budget-writers just added an extra $16.7 million to the state judiciary’s spending plan � an increase equal to the 5.6 percent boost given to trial courts. Department of Finance officials said the SAL extension was based on an agreement between Schwarzenegger and George. “What is this agreement?” asked Sen. Mike Machado, D-Linden, at a budget subcommittee hearing earlier this month. “Is it a handshake? Is it a piece of paper? This is news to me. How many other sidebar agreements do we have that are going to be coming up?” Department of Finance staffers said quietly that they didn’t know of any others. “Maybe we don’t need the Department of Finance if all it’s going to do is rubber-stamp proposals that say ‘Co-equal, therefore good,’” said Machado, who chairs the subcommittee with oversight of the judiciary’s budget. And with that, Machado told the Department of Finance to justify its approval of the spending proposals already submitted by the judiciary. Judicial leaders have tried to stay away from the spat between the governor and the Legislature. And they recently unveiled their proposed spending list for the extra money. Some of the $16.7 million would go toward more staffing for the California Appellate Project in San Francisco, additional help for court-appointed counsel for children in dependency cases, and three new positions in the Habeas Corpus Resource Center. Early signs suggest that the Legislature will let the judiciary spend most, if not all, of the $16.7 million. But lawmakers have also warned court leaders not to expect to keep future budget gifts from the governor.

Cheryl Miller

TO BE INSANE, OR NOT TO BE? The trial of Hamlet last week was a disappointment only in one respect: The jury deadlocked. Otherwise, things went well for two Berkeley defense lawyers, Miles Ehrlich and Cristina Arguedas, as well as their opponents and U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who presided over the fake Shakespearean trial at Washington, D.C.’s Kennedy Center last week. The justice approached Ehrlich � his former clerk, and an ex-federal prosecutor in San Francisco � last year, and asked if he would take part on the prosecution’s side in a trial over Hamlet’s sanity. And Ehrlich brought in Arguedas, an ex-federal public defender who now specializes in white-collar cases. Their opponents were Abbe Lowell, a partner at Chadbourne & Parke in D.C. who specializes in white-collar defense, and Court TV host Catherine Crier. Before a crowd of 1,100, the prosecuting lawyers did their best to convince a 12-person jury that Hamlet wasn’t crazy � that his killings were rational, and that he should be held accountable. “Instead of treating Hamlet like this cold-blooded, callous killer,” said Ehrlich, of Berkeley’s Ramsey & Ehrlich, the prosecutors were able to use Hamlet’s eloquence and careful planning to try to prove he was a sane killer. Alas, the jury didn’t quite agree. After deliberating for 20 minutes, they deadlocked. (Ehrlich points out, though, that the burden was on the defense to prove Hamlet’s insanity.) It was Arguedas’ first experience as a prosecutor. “I think it’s really easy,” said the partner at Arguedas, Cassman & Headley. “I suspected that, and now I know it’s true.” Both Ehrlich and Arguedas said they appreciated the opportunity to read “Hamlet” again. “I would never have been reading Shakespeare, especially now, and I really enjoyed it,” Arguedas said. She added that by reading the play with the specific purpose of working up a case, she got a new window into Hamlet as a character. Ehrlich said the case reminded him a lot of the white-collar prosecutions he’s handling now, where culpability is based on a defendant’s state of mind, and whether his client intended to commit a crime. “So much, particularly in white-collar work, is having to find out from people’s words and actions, to get a window into their mind,” he said. “And here, you didn’t have to work with some boring transcript.”

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at cus[email protected]

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.