Court issues order on Coonrod defense costs
Lead Summary
By
Brandy Chandler-brandychandler@gmail.com
A fire investigation agency that performed testing and other investigatory work for the defense in the Wesley Coonrod trial asked that Highland County Common Pleas Court pay $30,000 more for their work than the court initially approved.
According to a court entry issued Wednesday by Highland County Common Pleas Court Judge Rocky Coss, $13,000 had been approved for compensation prior to the start of trial. The court denied the request to pay the full amount and approved a total of $23,828 for the fire investigation services, saying that, "When this court approves appointment of an expert and payment of funds for services for a defendant in a criminal case, it does not, by such order, issue a blank check upon the county treasury."
Coss wrote that had the court known the request would be so large, he would have required the defense to put out bids.
Highland County Common Pleas Court is continuing to compile figures on how much the October murder trial of Coonrod cost the citizens of Highland County. With a second trial scheduled to begin the first week of January, Coss said those proceedings should cost thousands of dollars less than the first trial.
Last week Coss granted a defense motion for a change of venue. The
trial, scheduled to begin Jan. 3, 2011, will be held in Pickaway
County Common Pleas Court. Highland County taxpayers will still cover
the costs for the trial and reimburse Pickaway County for the
expenses.
Despite having to travel more than 50 miles to get to the new venue,
Coss said the second trial will not have a sequestered jury, which
cost the county more than $10,000 in October.
Coonrod is facing two charges of murder, unclassified felonies; and a charge of aggravated arson, stemming from a March 7 fire that killed his two sons, Thomas, 4, and Stephen. He was convicted of two charges of third-degree felony endangering children, but there was a hung jury on two counts of aggravated murder with death penalty specifications, two counts of murder, and one count of aggravated arson. The state is not retrying him on the capital murder charges.
On Wednesday, Coss filed entries ordering payments for defense witnesses and investigators. The defense had requested $4,856 for a consulting psychologist, and Coss approved payment of $3,500.
Coss, according to court documents, had initially approved $10,000 to go toward a consulting fire investigator. The defense asked the court for up to $25,000 for the fire investigator, SEA, Ltd., and did not include any itemization. According to SEA, they had initially asked defense counsel to request "additional authority up to $30,000," but the court states "there was no additional project estimate submitted between July 2 ... and the date the trial commenced. Therefore, all work done in excess of $13,000 (which had been approved by the court) was done without prior approval of the court."
According to Coss' decision, "The court notes that the Oct. 14 billing contains charges for additional testing and videography that took place after the trial began. All test results of defense experts were due to be provided to the state prior to the trial as required by Criminal Rule 16. Obviously, any test results performed after the commencement of the trial on Sept. 27 would not have been provided as required. The defendant did not offer as evidence, and the court did not admit any videos of the testing done. The court would not have admitted them if offered."
Coss wrote that the court "has the authority to reject payment of all amounts in excess of the $13,000 which it has previously approved [The $10,000 initially approved and additional approved charges bringing the total to $13,000.].
"The amount billed far exceeds this and there is no excuse offered as to why its projected budget was so far off," Coss wrote. "When this court approves appointment of an expert and payment of funds for services for a defendant in a criminal case, it does not by such order issue a blank check upon the county treasury. Defendant was aware of the county's precarious financial situation. The court accepted the hourly rate of $165 to $225 per hour originally submitted by defendant, and the original project estimate. Had the court had any indication that the requested expense would would be so large, it would have required defendant to solicit competing bids from other fire investigation experts and compared hourly rates and projected estimates before authorizing an expert. The court felt it could rely upon the representations of the quotes and estimates being submitted as being reasonable and did so."
After examining bills and invoices in the request, Coss granted a total of $23,828, which was $6,454 less than the $25,000 the defense requested. As the court had previously ordered a payment of $13,000, there is now a balance left of $10,828.
Additionally, the court has received a projected cost estimate from SEA, Ltd. for $20,000 for the second trial, scheduled to begin Jan. 3.
"The estimated amount is $20,000 which the court finds to be excessive at this time," according to court documents.
As testing has been completed, and the amount of preparation for testimony shall be "greatly reduced" as this is the second time SEA witnesses will testify, according to Coss' entry, the court approved a total of $5,010 in compensation for SEA witnesses. Additionally, the court will approve mileage for each witness.
A fire investigation agency that performed testing and other investigatory work for the defense in the Wesley Coonrod trial asked that Highland County Common Pleas Court pay $30,000 more for their work than the court initially approved.
According to a court entry issued Wednesday by Highland County Common Pleas Court Judge Rocky Coss, $13,000 had been approved for compensation prior to the start of trial. The court denied the request to pay the full amount and approved a total of $23,828 for the fire investigation services, saying that, "When this court approves appointment of an expert and payment of funds for services for a defendant in a criminal case, it does not, by such order, issue a blank check upon the county treasury."
Coss wrote that had the court known the request would be so large, he would have required the defense to put out bids.
Highland County Common Pleas Court is continuing to compile figures on how much the October murder trial of Coonrod cost the citizens of Highland County. With a second trial scheduled to begin the first week of January, Coss said those proceedings should cost thousands of dollars less than the first trial.
Last week Coss granted a defense motion for a change of venue. The trial, scheduled to begin Jan. 3, 2011, will be held in Pickaway County Common Pleas Court. Highland County taxpayers will still cover the costs for the trial and reimburse Pickaway County for the expenses.
Despite having to travel more than 50 miles to get to the new venue, Coss said the second trial will not have a sequestered jury, which cost the county more than $10,000 in October.
Coonrod is facing two charges of murder, unclassified felonies; and a charge of aggravated arson, stemming from a March 7 fire that killed his two sons, Thomas, 4, and Stephen. He was convicted of two charges of third-degree felony endangering children, but there was a hung jury on two counts of aggravated murder with death penalty specifications, two counts of murder, and one count of aggravated arson. The state is not retrying him on the capital murder charges.
On Wednesday, Coss filed entries ordering payments for defense witnesses and investigators. The defense had requested $4,856 for a consulting psychologist, and Coss approved payment of $3,500.
Coss, according to court documents, had initially approved $10,000 to go toward a consulting fire investigator. The defense asked the court for up to $25,000 for the fire investigator, SEA, Ltd., and did not include any itemization. According to SEA, they had initially asked defense counsel to request "additional authority up to $30,000," but the court states "there was no additional project estimate submitted between July 2 ... and the date the trial commenced. Therefore, all work done in excess of $13,000 (which had been approved by the court) was done without prior approval of the court."
According to Coss' decision, "The court notes that the Oct. 14 billing contains charges for additional testing and videography that took place after the trial began. All test results of defense experts were due to be provided to the state prior to the trial as required by Criminal Rule 16. Obviously, any test results performed after the commencement of the trial on Sept. 27 would not have been provided as required. The defendant did not offer as evidence, and the court did not admit any videos of the testing done. The court would not have admitted them if offered."
Coss wrote that the court "has the authority to reject payment of all amounts in excess of the $13,000 which it has previously approved [The $10,000 initially approved and additional approved charges bringing the total to $13,000.].
"The amount billed far exceeds this and there is no excuse offered as to why its projected budget was so far off," Coss wrote. "When this court approves appointment of an expert and payment of funds for services for a defendant in a criminal case, it does not by such order issue a blank check upon the county treasury. Defendant was aware of the county's precarious financial situation. The court accepted the hourly rate of $165 to $225 per hour originally submitted by defendant, and the original project estimate. Had the court had any indication that the requested expense would would be so large, it would have required defendant to solicit competing bids from other fire investigation experts and compared hourly rates and projected estimates before authorizing an expert. The court felt it could rely upon the representations of the quotes and estimates being submitted as being reasonable and did so."
After examining bills and invoices in the request, Coss granted a total of $23,828, which was $6,454 less than the $25,000 the defense requested. As the court had previously ordered a payment of $13,000, there is now a balance left of $10,828.
Additionally, the court has received a projected cost estimate from SEA, Ltd. for $20,000 for the second trial, scheduled to begin Jan. 3.
"The estimated amount is $20,000 which the court finds to be excessive at this time," according to court documents.
As testing has been completed, and the amount of preparation for testimony shall be "greatly reduced" as this is the second time SEA witnesses will testify, according to Coss' entry, the court approved a total of $5,010 in compensation. Additionally, the court will approve mileage for each witness.
[[In-content Ad]]