Judges Won’t Say Which Law Firm They Favor for Contract

Ventura County judges decided Wednesday which law firm they will recommend be awarded an annual contract to represent poor defendants in criminal cases, but refused to identify the legal group selected.

Conflict Defense Associates partner James M. Farley said Wednesday night that he had not been officially notified of the vote, but was informed that it was in favor of his firm.

“Somebody else called me and said the vote was favorable,” he said. “We haven’t heard anything official.”

Conflict Defense Associates has held the contract for 18 years. The firm represents indigent clients when the public defender’s office declares a conflict of interest, such as when more than one defendant is charged in the same case. The firm handles about 375 felony and 500 misdemeanor cases annually.

Although the negotiation process for the contract is still underway, the judges’ endorsement carries significant weight and will likely influence the county Board of Supervisors, which is set to make a final decision next month.

The judges reached a decision Wednesday at a noon meeting, but did not announce their recommendation publicly, holding off until the bidders could be notified.

Judge Charles W. Campbell Jr. did not return calls seeking comment.

The judges’ recommendation comes four weeks after the presiding judge warned Conflict Defense Associates’ partners that they risked losing their longtime contract because of repeated budget overruns.

The firm has exceeded its $1.3-million annual contract in each of the past three years, requiring the county to make extra payments totaling $1.4 million.

The overruns prompted county officials this spring to aggressively seek competing bids for the first time. They advertised in legal journals and on the Internet.

The effort produced a competing bid by John A. Barker & Associates, a law firm based in Madera, just north of Fresno.

Barker’s $1.1-million proposal undercut by more than half the original $2.4-million bid from Conflict Defense Associates.

Barker could not be reached for comment Wednesday.

Farley said his firm recently submitted a revised offer. He did not disclose the amount, explaining that the proposals remain confidential until the bidding process is completed. But he said it was lower than his firm’s initial bid.

The supervisors are scheduled to vote on a final selection July 13, and a new annual contract would begin Aug. 1.