By John Lyon
Arkansas News Bureau
LITTLE ROCK — State law does not support a judge’s ruling that the Arkansas Public Defender Commission must pay the expenses of accused recruiting center killer Abdul-Hakim Muhammad’s defense, the commission’s executive director argued today before the state Supreme Court.
A privately hired attorney for Muhammad, who faces a capital murder charge in the fatal shooting of an Army recruiter in Little Rock, argued that the judge’s ruling is not only legal but also will save the state money.
The Public Defender Commission is appealing a January order by Pulaski County Circuit Judge Herb Wright requiring it to pay the expenses for Muhammad’s defense. Muhammad’s family has hired a lawyer, Claiborne Ferguson of Memphis, Tenn., to represent Muhammad.
Muhammad is charged with capital murder, attempted capital murder and unlawful discharge of a weapon in the shooting death of Army Pvt. William Long of Conway and the wounding of Pvt. Quinton Ezeagwula of Jacksonville. The shootings occurred June 1 as the two soldiers stood outside the Army-Navy Career Center in west Little Rock.
Muhammad has said the shootings were in response to U.S. military actions in the Middle East. The state is seeking the death penalty.
Didi Sallings, the commission’s executive director, told the Supreme Court today that if Wright’s ruling were allowed to stand, it would open the door to other defendants with private attorneys seeking state funds for their defense. Wright’s ruling conflicts with state law, she said.
“You have a constitutional right to an attorney. You don’t have a constitutional right to pick your attorney,” Sallings said.
Justice Robert Brown asked Sallings if it was true that the law authorizes the commission to pay “reasonable and necessary” expenses of an indigent defendant. Sallings said it was, but that when read in context, the provision clearly applies only to defendants with appointed attorneys.
“I don’t think the Legislature even contemplated that this would be an issue,” she said.
Sallings also questioned Ferguson’s qualifications, saying that to her knowledge he has never tried a death-penalty case.
Ferguson said the law in question authorizes the commission to pay for an appointed attorney “or” reasonable and necessary expenses. The use of the word “or” shows that the Legislature considered the possibility that the commission could pay for expenses when an attorney was not appointed, he said.
Justice Elana Cunningham Wills said the court has sometimes interpreted the word “or” as “and” when trying to divine legislative intent. Ferguson said he believed the use of the word “or” was deliberate in this instance.
Ferguson also said his hiring would benefit the state because it would lessen the workload of the state’s public defenders. He said he would not ask the state to pay for anything that it would not pay for if a public defender were representing Muhammad.
“It is not a burden for the state of Arkansas. It is in fact a windfall for the state of Arkansas,” he said.
Regarding his credentials, Ferguson argued that the Public Defenders Commission would violate Muhammad’s constitutional rights if it were to challenge his choice of a lawyer.
In an interview after the hearing, Ferguson said Sallings was not truthful when she said he had never tried a death-penalty case.
“She knows I have. I’ve sent her the paperwork,” he said.
The Supreme Court did not immediately issue a ruling today but has said it will give expedited consideration to the case because Muhammad’s trial is set for June.
