Popular Searches
Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
Share
Keeler asks for removal of county judges
By Andrew Amelinckx
Eugene Keeler, the Columbia County conflict defender, is asking for the removal of two Columbia County judges for allegedly blocking his appointments in cases and in so doing costing the county’s taxpayers thousands of dollars.
Keeler has filed a complaint with the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct against judges Jonathan Nichols and Paul Czajka for allegedly acting “capriciously, illegally and unethically” and engaging “in clandestine party politics” against him in his professional capacity.
He said they did this to ensure that “certain members of the Republican Party” in county government had reason not to renew his position as conflict defender by preventing him from doing his duty.
“It’s a pattern of conduct,” he said. “They’re attempting to deprive me of my employment.”
Nichols and Czajka did not comment on the complaint, as judges are not legally allowed to comment on cases such as this one.
Keeler stated in his complaint that by hiring private attorneys, instead of giving the cases to him, the judges’ actions “have cost and will cost the taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars.”
He believes the numbers could be as much as $50,000.
Keeler based these numbers on pay vouchers for assigned counsel from July 2008 through August 2009 that, he said, “on the surface,” indicated that he could have handled the cases, which were instead handed off to private attorneys.
The final figure given in the complaint totals $38, 250. 30, but, said Keeler, there were likely more that are thus far unpaid.
According to Doug McGivney, D-Kinderhook, who heads the county’s Legal Committee, they have been looking at “considerable increase” in costs the county has incurred from paying for private attorneys in county court cases, but he was unable to provide the Register-Star with any numbers in regard to the increases due to his being on vacation at the time of the interview.
“We’ve come to no conclusion,” he said of the investigation.
It has been suggested, said McGivney, that the increases were due to there being more crime in the county, but based upon his research, he found that the number of cases has remained fairly consistent over the past five years.
According to the state Department of Criminal Justice Services, the number of dispositions — felony, violent felony and felony drug — has seen a slight increase over the last five years, from 335 in 2004 to 389 in 2008. There were around 40 more cases in 2008 than in 2007. This year’s statistics have yet to be released.
He pointed out that the Legal Committee was only looking into the pay vouchers for private counsel and had nothing to do with any aspect of the allegations against the judges.
The conflict public defender position, established by the county Board of Supervisors in June 2005, was created to help cut the cost of having to hire outside attorneys to represent indigent defendants that the Public Defender’s Office couldn’t represent due to a conflict of interest.
According to Keeler he had been acting in the capacity of the conflict public defender since 1994.
“I was a salaried county employee,” he said, adding that the position was on an “informal basis” until 2005 when it was formalized by the BOS.
In July 2005 the BOS officially created the alternate conflict public defender position and this past summer did the same with the second-alternate conflict defender position.
McGivney said they created the second-alternate position in the hopes of saving money.
“It didn’t,” he said of the move.
According to the local law, the alternate conflict public defender handles Family Court cases in which the Public Defender’s Office has a conflict of interest, but that if the alternate is unable to do it that job would fall to the conflict public defender.
In criminal cases in which the Public Defender’s Office disqualifies, the conflict public defender handles the case.
“I’m supposed to be the go-to guy,” Keeler said.
The alternate CPD would also represent indigent defendants in criminal cases but would only do so “sparingly” when there was a conflict of interest with the conflict public defender, according to the local law.
The second-alternate conflict public defender is next in line.
According to Keeler, that hasn’t been happening. Instead, he said, the judges are either leap-frogging over him or appointing private attorneys.
“I haven’t had one case,” said Keeler, “not one ... in family court in over 1 1/2 years.”
Keeler said the judges aren’t following county law.
“They’re not even calling me to tell me I’m off a case I have to keep calling to find out,” he said.
He said he believes they are doing this because he is an “outspoken critic of the county’s judicial system.”
According to Keeler, the origin of the problem goes back to the 2007 District Attorney race between himself and the current District Attorney, Beth Cozzolino.
In a debate held by the League of Women Voters in Hudson, Keeler accused Cozzolino of giving “special treatment” to the brother of Holly Tanner, who is the Columbia County clerk and worked on Cozzolino’s re-election campaign. The allegations were never proven in the case.
Keeler’s comments led to Nichols’ filing a complaint against him for professional misconduct because Keeler had represented Tanner’s brother in a court case.
The Committee on Professional Standards, which reviews complaints against attorneys, determined there was an “insufficient basis” for finding professional misconduct in the case and closed the file on the matter. It is made up of 21 members of both attorneys and non-attorneys and is part of the state court system’s appellate division.
Section 100.3(D)(2) of the Rules Governing Judicial Conduct states that “a judge who receives information indicating a substantial likelihood that a lawyer has committed a substantial violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility shall take appropriate action,” but doesn’t indicate what is considered “appropriate action.”
Keeler filed counter complaints for both Nichols and Cozzolino, which were also dismissed.
According to Keeler, five days after a Register-Star article appeared on the matter, a letter from the judges was received by the Public Defender’s Office requiring that “the Public Defender’s Office ... provide this court with the original Public Defender Application on all felony cases. A copy of the pending charges and a notation of who has been assigned to represent the defendant is also required prior to this court scheduling any proceedings relative to these matters.”
Keeler believes this was to keep him off cases.
“It’s egregious behavior,” he said, calling it retribution. “They’re obviously punishing me for my outspokenness.”
According to a list provided by Keeler from the complaint, from July 2008 until now both judges have removed him from 24 cases.
He said in the cases there didn’t appear to be conflict of interest and no reasonable cause had been determined in any of them.
Keeler provided documentation from several cases before the judges that he felt showed that he had been taken off the cases without just cause.
In a Feb. 25 court appearance before Judge Paul Czajka, where Keeler was representing a man named Michael Feranda on a felony DWI case, Czajka took Keeler off the case at the request of the defendant.
During the hearing Czajka told the defendant that he had the right to hire any attorney he liked, but couldn’t pick and choose free attorneys.
While Keeler was representing Feranda on five different cases in town courts in the county, attorney Shane Zoni was representing the defendant on one case. Czajka decided to have Zoni handle the case in county court.
At the hearing Keeler asserted that it wasn’t his representation that was in question, but rather the fact that the District Attorney’s Office had offered Feranda a one to three year prison term and that was behind the defendant’s request to change lawyers.
In another case before Czajka, this involving a defendant named Ethlyn Rhymaun who was about to be sentenced on a burglary conviction on Sept. 24, 2008, Keeler was once again removed.
In this case Keeler was representing the defendant on five separate cases in various town courts.
Rhymaun, who called Keeler “Hang ‘em High” said that the reason she wanted another lawyer had to do with what she had heard about his abilities as an attorney from others in the community.
On this occasion Keeler blamed the defendant’s wish to have a new lawyer on an offer by the District Attorney’s Office of five years in prison, consecutive with another two to four year sentence. “I can’t force the DA’s Office to do something the defendant would like to see,” he told the court.
Czajka told Keeler he could voluntarily withdraw from the case if he wanted, to which Keeler responded that he was “ready, willing and able to perform his duties,” citing the “extensive work” he had done on the case over the course of nine months.
In this case, as in the other, Czajka told the defendant that since Keeler was a free attorney she didn’t have the right to choose which person represented her.
Czajka decided to replace Keeler on the case, but stated that he was “making no finding” as to the reason.
In Keeler’s complaint against the judges he cited a number of cases in which the State Supreme Court reaffirmed that there must be sufficient cause, determined by a hearing, in order to allow a defendant to change their court appointed attorney.
In the 1992 case involving the legal aid society of Orange County versus Judge Pano Patsalos, the Appellate Court ordered the judge to comply with the county plan unless he could satisfactorily prove there was a conflict of interest and have an attorney removed form a case.
Citing a 1978 case involving David Berkowitz, the infamous “Son of Sam” killer, Keeler pointed out that the state Supreme Court stated in the case that the court must make appointments according to any county statutes pertaining to it.
In Columbia County there are statutes regarding reappointment of counsel and, according to Keeler, they aren’t being followed by the county judges.
“It looks like social, economic and political corruption is alive and well in the courthouse,” said Keeler. “And the taxpayers be damned.”
To reach reporter Andrew Amelinckx call 518- 828-1616, ext. 2267 or e-mail aamelinckx@registerstar.com.
Keeler has filed a complaint with the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct against judges Jonathan Nichols and Paul Czajka for allegedly acting “capriciously, illegally and unethically” and engaging “in clandestine party politics” against him in his professional capacity.
He said they did this to ensure that “certain members of the Republican Party” in county government had reason not to renew his position as conflict defender by preventing him from doing his duty.
“It’s a pattern of conduct,” he said. “They’re attempting to deprive me of my employment.”
Nichols and Czajka did not comment on the complaint, as judges are not legally allowed to comment on cases such as this one.
Keeler stated in his complaint that by hiring private attorneys, instead of giving the cases to him, the judges’ actions “have cost and will cost the taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars.”
He believes the numbers could be as much as $50,000.
Keeler based these numbers on pay vouchers for assigned counsel from July 2008 through August 2009 that, he said, “on the surface,” indicated that he could have handled the cases, which were instead handed off to private attorneys.
The final figure given in the complaint totals $38, 250. 30, but, said Keeler, there were likely more that are thus far unpaid.
According to Doug McGivney, D-Kinderhook, who heads the county’s Legal Committee, they have been looking at “considerable increase” in costs the county has incurred from paying for private attorneys in county court cases, but he was unable to provide the Register-Star with any numbers in regard to the increases due to his being on vacation at the time of the interview.
“We’ve come to no conclusion,” he said of the investigation.
It has been suggested, said McGivney, that the increases were due to there being more crime in the county, but based upon his research, he found that the number of cases has remained fairly consistent over the past five years.
According to the state Department of Criminal Justice Services, the number of dispositions — felony, violent felony and felony drug — has seen a slight increase over the last five years, from 335 in 2004 to 389 in 2008. There were around 40 more cases in 2008 than in 2007. This year’s statistics have yet to be released.
He pointed out that the Legal Committee was only looking into the pay vouchers for private counsel and had nothing to do with any aspect of the allegations against the judges.
The conflict public defender position, established by the county Board of Supervisors in June 2005, was created to help cut the cost of having to hire outside attorneys to represent indigent defendants that the Public Defender’s Office couldn’t represent due to a conflict of interest.
According to Keeler he had been acting in the capacity of the conflict public defender since 1994.
“I was a salaried county employee,” he said, adding that the position was on an “informal basis” until 2005 when it was formalized by the BOS.
In July 2005 the BOS officially created the alternate conflict public defender position and this past summer did the same with the second-alternate conflict defender position.
McGivney said they created the second-alternate position in the hopes of saving money.
“It didn’t,” he said of the move.
According to the local law, the alternate conflict public defender handles Family Court cases in which the Public Defender’s Office has a conflict of interest, but that if the alternate is unable to do it that job would fall to the conflict public defender.
In criminal cases in which the Public Defender’s Office disqualifies, the conflict public defender handles the case.
“I’m supposed to be the go-to guy,” Keeler said.
The alternate CPD would also represent indigent defendants in criminal cases but would only do so “sparingly” when there was a conflict of interest with the conflict public defender, according to the local law.
The second-alternate conflict public defender is next in line.
According to Keeler, that hasn’t been happening. Instead, he said, the judges are either leap-frogging over him or appointing private attorneys.
“I haven’t had one case,” said Keeler, “not one ... in family court in over 1 1/2 years.”
Keeler said the judges aren’t following county law.
“They’re not even calling me to tell me I’m off a case I have to keep calling to find out,” he said.
He said he believes they are doing this because he is an “outspoken critic of the county’s judicial system.”
According to Keeler, the origin of the problem goes back to the 2007 District Attorney race between himself and the current District Attorney, Beth Cozzolino.
In a debate held by the League of Women Voters in Hudson, Keeler accused Cozzolino of giving “special treatment” to the brother of Holly Tanner, who is the Columbia County clerk and worked on Cozzolino’s re-election campaign. The allegations were never proven in the case.
Keeler’s comments led to Nichols’ filing a complaint against him for professional misconduct because Keeler had represented Tanner’s brother in a court case.
The Committee on Professional Standards, which reviews complaints against attorneys, determined there was an “insufficient basis” for finding professional misconduct in the case and closed the file on the matter. It is made up of 21 members of both attorneys and non-attorneys and is part of the state court system’s appellate division.
Section 100.3(D)(2) of the Rules Governing Judicial Conduct states that “a judge who receives information indicating a substantial likelihood that a lawyer has committed a substantial violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility shall take appropriate action,” but doesn’t indicate what is considered “appropriate action.”
Keeler filed counter complaints for both Nichols and Cozzolino, which were also dismissed.
According to Keeler, five days after a Register-Star article appeared on the matter, a letter from the judges was received by the Public Defender’s Office requiring that “the Public Defender’s Office ... provide this court with the original Public Defender Application on all felony cases. A copy of the pending charges and a notation of who has been assigned to represent the defendant is also required prior to this court scheduling any proceedings relative to these matters.”
Keeler believes this was to keep him off cases.
“It’s egregious behavior,” he said, calling it retribution. “They’re obviously punishing me for my outspokenness.”
According to a list provided by Keeler from the complaint, from July 2008 until now both judges have removed him from 24 cases.
He said in the cases there didn’t appear to be conflict of interest and no reasonable cause had been determined in any of them.
Keeler provided documentation from several cases before the judges that he felt showed that he had been taken off the cases without just cause.
In a Feb. 25 court appearance before Judge Paul Czajka, where Keeler was representing a man named Michael Feranda on a felony DWI case, Czajka took Keeler off the case at the request of the defendant.
During the hearing Czajka told the defendant that he had the right to hire any attorney he liked, but couldn’t pick and choose free attorneys.
While Keeler was representing Feranda on five different cases in town courts in the county, attorney Shane Zoni was representing the defendant on one case. Czajka decided to have Zoni handle the case in county court.
At the hearing Keeler asserted that it wasn’t his representation that was in question, but rather the fact that the District Attorney’s Office had offered Feranda a one to three year prison term and that was behind the defendant’s request to change lawyers.
In another case before Czajka, this involving a defendant named Ethlyn Rhymaun who was about to be sentenced on a burglary conviction on Sept. 24, 2008, Keeler was once again removed.
In this case Keeler was representing the defendant on five separate cases in various town courts.
Rhymaun, who called Keeler “Hang ‘em High” said that the reason she wanted another lawyer had to do with what she had heard about his abilities as an attorney from others in the community.
On this occasion Keeler blamed the defendant’s wish to have a new lawyer on an offer by the District Attorney’s Office of five years in prison, consecutive with another two to four year sentence. “I can’t force the DA’s Office to do something the defendant would like to see,” he told the court.
Czajka told Keeler he could voluntarily withdraw from the case if he wanted, to which Keeler responded that he was “ready, willing and able to perform his duties,” citing the “extensive work” he had done on the case over the course of nine months.
In this case, as in the other, Czajka told the defendant that since Keeler was a free attorney she didn’t have the right to choose which person represented her.
Czajka decided to replace Keeler on the case, but stated that he was “making no finding” as to the reason.
In Keeler’s complaint against the judges he cited a number of cases in which the State Supreme Court reaffirmed that there must be sufficient cause, determined by a hearing, in order to allow a defendant to change their court appointed attorney.
In the 1992 case involving the legal aid society of Orange County versus Judge Pano Patsalos, the Appellate Court ordered the judge to comply with the county plan unless he could satisfactorily prove there was a conflict of interest and have an attorney removed form a case.
Citing a 1978 case involving David Berkowitz, the infamous “Son of Sam” killer, Keeler pointed out that the state Supreme Court stated in the case that the court must make appointments according to any county statutes pertaining to it.
In Columbia County there are statutes regarding reappointment of counsel and, according to Keeler, they aren’t being followed by the county judges.
“It looks like social, economic and political corruption is alive and well in the courthouse,” said Keeler. “And the taxpayers be damned.”
To reach reporter Andrew Amelinckx call 518- 828-1616, ext. 2267 or e-mail aamelinckx@registerstar.com.
Share this Article
 |
||
| Bidders tour wastewater plant facility |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of registerstar.com.
grantdine wrote on Nov 22, 2009 1:58 AM:
" If you thin that is bad read the book Scandal in the Courtroom, Found Gulty without Trial. It all started in Hudson in the big courtroom. I remember it well. Mr. Czajka should remember it too. "
mr.happy wrote on Nov 24, 2009 3:16 PM:
" mr.czajka is a quite the judge.my brother went before him years ago and was given a big sentence because the judge was in a bad mood. and keeler i wouldnt have him represent my dog. "
stonepound wrote on Nov 24, 2009 7:49 PM:
" Keeler is one of the best people to goto when the columbia county republican machine goes after you for standing up for your rights. The republicans work hard to destroy his reputation because he ran for da, but the guy know how to keep the GOP at bay. If you need a lawyer to stand up to the gop and not knuckle under he is your man. "
You must register with a valid email to post comments. Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Registered users sign in here: |
Become a Registered User |
stonepound wrote on Nov 18, 2009 7:18 PM: