Pact to Defend Indigent to Be Split 3 Ways : Courts: Attorney William W. Stewart will retain a share in an apparent compromise reached by a panel of municipal judges.

In an apparent compromise, a panel of judges agreed Wednesday that attorney William W. Stewart should retain a financial interest in a lucrative county contract to defend poor people accused of crimes--but should share the caseload with two other law firms.

Stewart, who has been the subject of criticism in recent weeks on his handling of the nearly $1-million-a-year contract, would share in rotating court assignments as part of a “pilot project” presented by Presiding Judge Gregory H. Lewis of the Central District of Orange County Municipal Court.

If the proposal is approved by Stewart, who has a year remaining on the existing contract, it could result in a significant financial loss for him if case assignments are rotated equally among the three firms.

Details about how the reorganization would operate were not immediately available, but ultimate approval must be given by the County Board of Supervisors. A separate review of the Stewart contract is underway in the county administrative office.

Stewart and Lewis could not be reached for comment Wednesday.

The Santa Ana defense attorney has held firm control of the pact for 15 years, but he has come under fire in recent weeks for subletting hundreds of indigent cases to outside attorneys while retaining a share of the profits.

Recently, Central Court District judges have also expressed concern that court hearings were being delayed because contract attorneys were not always available to cover such a large caseload. Last year, Stewart’s firm handled more than 1,200 cases.

In recent interviews, Stewart vowed to maintain his interest in the contract.

In a brief written statement Wednesday night, Lewis said that Stewart’s performance was reviewed by judges of the Central Court District, who found there were “no grounds for concern on the part of the court or the public.”

The judge also said that Stewart has a “history of support” from the courts where his firm has been involved in contract cases.

Lewis has been a staunch supporter of Stewart even as harsh criticisms have been leveled by colleagues, Municipal Court Judges Margaret R. Anderson and Pamela L. Iles.

Anderson and Iles are members of a county advisory committee that oversees indigent defense policy. The judges have indicated their displeasure with Stewart for virtually abandoning his role in the courtroom so that he could tend to other business interests in Las Vegas and the countries of Colombia and Russia.

Stewart, who at one point called the two judges “idiots” in reference to their comments, has repeatedly defended his handling of the contract, saying his firm has provided “excellent” legal services to hundreds of indigent clients.

In recent interviews, Stewart said the criticisms have come from “small people who like to talk trash about other people.”

Although details of the reorganization were not immediately available, Stewart could see his profits slip by up to two-thirds if indigent assignments are rotated equally among two other law firms who now serve as back-ups. Last year the county paid his firm more than $700,000, and in previous years those payments have approached $1 million.

The public defender’s office generally provides legal services to indigent clients but must defer to private firms under contract to the county when conflicts arise in cases where there are multiple defendants. In Santa Ana, Stewart’s firm has the contract for referrals.

The backup defense firms of Patrick McNeal and Laz & Hall have handled only those Central District Court cases in which Stewart’s firm has disqualified itself because of various conflicts of interest. Under the reorganization plan those firms would share the contract with Stewart on a rotating basis.

Alan Slater, Orange County Superior Court executive officer, said Wednesday that he was unfamiliar with the judges’ reorganization plan, but expressed concern about whether the backup firms would be able to handle the increased caseload.

“I’m not so sure what is accomplished by that,” Slater said.