CHARLESTON, W.Va. — With an amendment that would add criminal cases, the House Judiciary Committee passed a bill that would establish an intermediate court of appeals in West Virginia.
That adds more responsibility and more expense to the court.
Passage by a 15-10 vote through the committee is a major step for Senate Bill 275, a concept that has found support in recent years in the state Senate but no path through the House of Delegates.
“I’m grateful to this committee that you’re giving it consideration and attention,” said Senate Judiciary Chairman Charles Trump, R-Morgan, a supporter of the legislation who testified on Friday before the House Judiciary Committee.
“This is four or five years on that bill, lots of variations, but I wouldn’t be doing that if I didn’t think it was important to the future of the state.”
The House Judiciary Committee started discussing the bill on Friday morning, took a break for a floor session and continued debating it into Friday afternoon.
The argument for an intermediate court of appeals is to provide another layer of certainty for cases to be reviewed.
“If you want people to come into this state you’re going to have to have some kind of predictable outcome,” said Delegate Tom Bibby, R-Berkeley.
“One thing this intermediate court is going to do, is you are going to have predictability.”
Its passage doesn’t mean everyone was for it.
“It will mean delays for West Virginia citizens,” said Delegate Chad Lovejoy, D-Cabell.
Citing a decreasing caseload in West Virginia’s court system, he concluded, “I respectfully say this court is unnecessary.”
The intermediate court would take on cases between the circuit court and Supreme Court levels. Those include civil lawsuits, family court appeals, workers compensation appeals and, now, criminal appeals.
The intermediate court is envisioned as two districts, northern and southern, with three judges on each panel.
The judges would be voted into office by citizens to serve 10-year terms. The terms would be staggered, and the judges wouldn’t be eligible for reappointment. The pay would be $130,000 a year.
The House Judiciary Committee, even prior to discussion, specified that the first judges would be elected in 2022 with the court starting up in 2023.
The other big change in House Judiciary was adding criminal cases.
That was an amendment proposed by Delegate Brandon Steele, R-Raleigh, who had raised the issue earlier.
“Would you agree from a philosophical standpoint it’s important for a criminal defendant to have that extra layer of appeal?” Steele had asked Trump prior to introducing the amendment.
He was able to persuade most committee members of that.
“Nothing is more important than life and liberty,” said Delegate Moore Capito, R-Kanawha.
But it comes with an increased monetary cost.
Steele had asked for a new fiscal note from the state Supreme Court. The cost estimate went up by about a million dollars a year from a prior fiscal note.
So the first-year cost is estimated to be $8.5 million.
“Because of the addition of criminal cases to the intermediate appeal process, additional staff attorneys would be required,” according to the fiscal note. “The additional staff attorneys were not included in the previous Fiscal Note for SB275.”
Steele said he isn’t worried about the cost.
“I don’t think this is going to increase cost that much,” he said.
Advocates have suggested some of the intermediate court’s cost would be offset by the consolidation of other current court system functions.
For example, a fiscal note from the Office of Insurance Commissioner calculates that eliminating the Office of Judges that reviews workers compensation cases would represent a savings of $2.5 million.
That didn’t quite jibe with Brad Crouser, chief administrative law judge of office of judges.
“I hate to dispute that. It’s all speculative, quite frankly,” Crouser said.
He said those workers compensation case require developing expertise and 30 to 35 employees to handle evidence, motions, orders and briefs.
“I’m thinking the savings are less than that amount,” he said.