One Republican judge doesn’t want that high-priced attorney for the bail lawsuit appeal

Credit where credit is due.

One of 15 Harris County judges challenging a federal order altering how bail works for indigent defendants has dropped out of the group that hired a pricey D.C. law firm to appeal the lawsuit.

Court at Law Judge Mike Fields, a Republican who has been on the bench since 1998, opted out of the appeal prepared by Cooper & Kirk, whose top lawyer, Charles “Chuck” Cooper, bills $550-per-hour, and who was just retained as private counsel for Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

Fields said in an interview Wednesday he still supports the appeal, but going forward he prefers to use the Harris County Attorney’s Office as his legal representative. He doesn’t want the county to spend more money on his behalf. He said he couldn’t imagine how much higher the bills will go.

“I hate to even speculate,” he said. “I know the average Harris County taxpayer makes $20 an hour — $550 an hour is a huge jump from there.”


The suit already cost Harris County about $3.5 million, and Fields, 52, said he cannot justify spending more money for the appeal, especially after the district, circuit and U.S. Supreme Court all denied the county’s request for stay of Rosenthal’s order. He said he supports the idea of a settlement, and several of his colleagues do as well.

I’m glad that the continuation of this lawsuit and the extreme price tag of this particular attorney has made Judge Fields uncomfortable. It should make him uncomfortable, and one wonders why it hasn’t made his Republican colleagues equally uncomfortable. Those colleagues of his who say they join him in supporting a settlement, they should come forward and make themselves known. At this point, it seems clear that the only way to end this lawsuit without dragging it out till the bitter end and handing a very large amount of taxpayer dollars to a fancy appellate attorney is for these judges to say “enough is enough”. Judge Fields is the first of sixteen Republican misdemeanor court judges to express that view. One down, fifteen to go.

Related Posts:

This entry was posted in Legal matters and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to One Republican judge doesn’t want that high-priced attorney for the bail lawsuit appeal

  1. The article didn’t say he didn’t support the appeal. It said he preferred using Harris County Attorneys to do it instead of paying the high price out of town lawyers. He also said he didn’t mind settling the lawsuit in light of the recent ruling by the 5th Circuit and SCOTUS. That is far from the free bond no consequences movement of the “progressives”. If the progressives were really concerned about the poor and impact of the Criminal laws on them then they would fight the Surcharges and the license suspensions that come from them. Pure hypocrisy plain and simple.

  2. Thank You For Your Honesty says:

    Thank you for your continued advocacy against the “Free bond no consequences” agenda, Mr. Kubosh. In a political climate in which the cynical impulse to self deal too often trumps common sense morality it is a breath of fresh air to hear from a good honest citizen with no vested interest in an issue.

  3. This is just a reminder that proponents of the same bail reforms that the plaintiffs in this lawsuit are seeking include such flaming liberals as Nathan Hecht and Sharon Keller.

  4. Paul Kubosh says:

    Just because they call themselves Republicans don’t mean they are conservative.

  5. Ross says:

    Paul, those surcharges are set by state law, not local policy, and there was an effort to do something about them during the recent legislative debacle, buy the Freedom Caucus morons and others derailed that effort in their zeal yo screw Texas taxpayers while making their backers richer.

  6. paul a kubosh says:


    It wasn’t just this legislative session that had someone try and kill the surcharges. Someone has made an attempt in almost every session since the surcharges were passed. Make no mistake about it Surcharges on poor people are a bi-partisan issue. They all love it. The Democrats and Republicans fund State Budget increases with Fees. Who better to pay more fees than poor people.

    As to you let em go Progressives let remind you what happens. Guy has 1st time D.W.I. PR bond. You would say well its the first time they have ever been charged so why not a PR bond. I would say he has been driving drunk many times before he actually got caught. You let him go with no consequences then he is D.W.I. again.

    1st time D.W.I. gets a 2nd D.W.I. again this is just a misdemeanor. You say let em go. I would say he has been driving drunk many many times and is probably an alcoholic and doesn’t deserve a PR bond. However, it is a misdemeanor so we let him go.

    2nd time D.W.I. gets a 3rd D.W.I. has a wreck and kills someone. Now we drop the hammer on him.

    1st two convictions slap on the writ 3rd convictions with a death we break the wrist.

    Man comes home from work slaps his wife around. Neighbors call Police. Police come out and ask Wife did he hit you. Wife says “NO” he would never do that. Police say you have a hand imprint on the side of your head, “HOW DID THAT HAPPEN” wife says “I SLAPPED MYSELF” police don’t believe her. They take statement from Neighbor and arrest husband. 36 hours later Husband with a nice progressive PR bond comes back home and beats the heck out of wife because she made him have to slap her in the first place.

    Drug dealer gets a arrested in poor neighborhood for misdemeanor theft. He sales Crack to everyone who has $20. Gets a nice PR bond comes back to same neighborhood and continues to sale crack to everyone. PROGRESSIVES and REPUBLICAN ELITE feel good about it because he isn’t in their jail and is instead back in the community where he belongs selling Crack to everyone who has $20.

    If the Crack dealer went to Memorial, the villages, God forbid Bellaire or any other White Republican Neighborhood they would immediately be picked up and dropped off at the nearest Crack house which by the way is in a poor neighborhood.

  7. Ross says:

    Paul, isn’t the purpose of bail to ensure the defendant shows up for trial? If a defendant has prior convictions, but has made every appearance, why should their bail be set so high they can’t pay it, and end up sitting in jail for an extended period?

  8. Bill Daniels says:


    I think Paul’s point was that we should be using bail as a means to keep dangerous people off the street, in the same way we remand certain folks. After all, what better way to end recidivism than to just keep people locked up?

  9. The defendant never bonds himself out. It is always the Mother, Father, Sister, Brother, Wife or girlfriend. $5,000 gets out for a minimum down payment of $250 or even less. 10,000 = $500 down payment etc. The reason the vast majority do not bond is because there is no family member, friend, etc. that wants to get the them out of jail. Some people are sick and tired of their family members criminal behavior and believe they deserve some jail therapy.

    I don’t expect any of you to understand this but at least I let you get a picture of the truth.

  10. neither here nor there says:

    Paul I was not going to respond but I find the word “Never” hard to believe. I would have to assume that someone has to post the bond for the defendant since he or she is in jail and not that no defendant is unable to post a bond because of lack of money.

  11. paul a kubosh says:


    It just goes to show how little all the progressives know about Bonding. How can a person post a bond for themselves if they are in jail? They have no access to funds. Take me for instance lets say I get arrested for bad mouthing Mayor Parker. I get taken to jail. Since I am rich I have a credit card, drivers license and $300 cash on me. When I get turned into jail the Sheriff’s takes all of that and puts it into inventory. I call all of my family members and tell them to go to a bondsman and post the bond for me. I promise them I will pay them back. My family members say they will never take the time to go down and post the bond for me. My only other option is to call a bonding company collect and ask them to post on a bond for me on the promise that I will pay them back.

    Sooooooooo after many many years of watching my brother post many many bonds for many many people I have never seen an arrested defendant rich or poor post a bond for himself.

    Your last statement “no defendant is unable to post a bond because of lack of money”. I never said that. Rich guy poor guy all the same. No Defendant ever posts his own bond.

    There are people in jail who do not have anyone who cares enough about them to post a bond or stated differently the family would rather have the sorry SOB locked up. Just the reality of it.

  12. paul a kubosh says:

    I am looking forward to seeing how many people who are out on PR bonds committing other crimes. All of you good folks will have blood on your hands.

  13. neither here nor there says:

    Paul that blood in your hand is not worthy of the argument. I guess that letting anyone out who paid a bond would put blood in the hands of all those that support bonds are letting people out before they serve the full time if they were to commit a crime and kill someone.

    Let us see what happens before we wish damnation on people.

  14. paul a kubosh says:

    “wish damnation” your words not mine. See how many people show up on a PR bond. No one to force them to be in court. The ultimate outcome will be more crime. You cannot get around that.

  15. Terrance Jewett says:

    I guess people in this country are no longer innocent until proven guilty.

  16. Terrance,

    That doesn’t even apply to the argument. Totally irrelevant.

  17. neither here nor there says:

    Paul argues if you support no bond there will be “blood on your hands”. Damnation sounded better, my opinion but you know what they say about those, like anal openings everyone is entitled to one (opinion).

Comments are closed.