Not only are court appointed counsel poorly paid, they may have to keep the judge happy to get future appointments.
The Honorable Richard S. Sheward of Franklin County told a lawyer that he could "rest assured I am not going to appoint you to any more cases for this kind of nonsense. You appealed it for nothing, that is what you did." So what kind of lawyers will the Honorable Richard S. Sheward appoint to cases in the future? Well his re-election video (you can see here) claims that Honorable Richard S. Sheward "delivers firm and fair justice." It would stand to reason that Sheward will appoint lawyers who do not stand in the way of his "firm and fair justice." If lawyers are made to satisfy judges, no matter how unreasonable they may be, is the lawyer going to do the best job possible for the client or do they have to make sure to keep the judges happy so they can be appointed to future cases?
In the case of State v. Tina Blay, the Honorable Richard S. Sheward made several comments to appointed counsel. He asked appointed counsel "did you go to law school?" When the appointed counsel told the judge that "I am being yelled and screamed at" the Honorable Richard S. Sheward asked "your feelings are hurt?" and later he asked if the appointed counsel could give him an amount of restitution "or would that also hurt your feelings?"
Judge Richard S. Sheward failed to hold a timely hearing when appointed counsel objected to the amount of restitution, and the Honorable Richard S. Sheward was reversed on appeal in State v. Tina Blay, 2010-Ohio-4749. When it came back to his court, Judge Sheward was not happy about the appeal (which had merit according to the Tenth District Court of Appeals).
Judge Sheward told appointed counsel that "this is a court-appointed case" and the appointed counsel "tries to do everything the hard way." Judge Sheward set up a hearing date on the restitution issue beyond the thirty days Blay had to file a timely Notice of Appeal. What if Blay failed to file a notice of appeal and Judge Sheward decided not to have the hearing? Blay would be out of time to file an appeal and would have to ask permission from the Court of Appeals to have an appeal. So Blay filed a Notice of Appeal, won on appeal, and the matter was remanded for a hearing on the restitution issue.
On remand, the Honorable Richard S. Sheward "used the restitution hearing to issue a barrage of berating and belittling remarks towards appellant's counsel. He unabashedly expressed his irritation with appellant's counsel." As a result of using the opportunity to berate and belittle Blay's counsel instead of conducting a meaningful hearing on the restitution issue, the Honorable Richard S. Sheward denied Blay "a meaningful opportunity to be heard on the issue of restitution" and denied Blay due process. Read the decision reversing the Honorable Richard S. Sheward a second time in this case in State v. Tina Blay, 2012-Ohio-62.
If you are accused of a crime or have been convicted already, contact me if you can afford to hire a private criminal defense lawyer. Otherwise, contact your county or state public defender to see if they can help.
Contact me 24/7 by sending an email to ohiocriminalappealslawyer@gmail.com
