clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Session Laws, 1980
Volume 739, Page 3337   View pdf image
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

HARRY HUGHES, Governor

3337

the court may not appoint an attorney who is with the
Office of the Public Defender; and providing that if
the court appoints private counsel, legal fees and
expenses are to be paid by the county or the City of
Baltimore administrative office of the courts.

May 27, 1980
Honorable James Clark, Jr.
President of the Senate
State House
Annapolis, Maryland 21404

Dear Mr. President:

In accordance with Article II, Section 17 of the
Maryland Constitution, I have today vetoed Senate Bill 78.

This bill provides that when the Public Defender's
Office declines to represent an indigent person entitled to
representation the Court may not appoint an attorney who is
with the Public Defender's Office; and further provides that
if the Court appoints private counsel, legal fees and
expense are to be paid by the Administrative Office of the
Courts.

Under the present language of Article 27A it seems
clear that a judge cannot appropriately appoint counsel for
a non-indigent defendant, nor can the Public Defender
represent such a person. Senate Bill 78 seems to authorize
a court to appoint private counsel for a defendant who does
not meet the standard of indigency. After conducting a
public hearing and thoroughly analyzing the provisions of
this bill, I feel that the effects of the bill would be to
establish questionable public policy and create a
substantial additional financial burden on the taxpayers of
the State. These results were not intended by the sponsor.

A secondary purpose for the bill was to require the
Administrative Office of the Courts to furnish the General
Assembly with information as to why judges appoint counsel
when the Public Defender declines representation. I do not
feel that legislation is required to achieve this objective.
The Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals has assured me that
he will endeavor to obtain this information.

Accordingly, while I recognize and share the legitimate
concerns of the General Assembly in this regard, I have
decided to veto Senate Bill 78.

Sincerely,
Harry Hughes
Governor

 

clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Session Laws, 1980
Volume 739, Page 3337   View pdf image
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 11, 2023
Maryland State Archives