Cost of border patrol agent’s case still being counted

By Jonathon Shacat
Wick News Service
Published/Last Modified on Tuesday, March 18, 2008 3:06 PM MDT


BISBEE — The exact cost to prosecute and defend Border Patrol Agent Nicholas Corbett’s murder trial is not clear, but the amount could likely be counted in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.


Corbett is charged with second-degree murder, manslaughter and negligent homicide of Francisco Dominguez-Rivera. On March 7, a federal judge declared a mistrial in his case because the jury could not decide on a verdict. Prosecutors plan to retry the case.

Cochise County Attorney Ed Rheinheimer said the cost of the prosecution is being paid for with Criminal Justice Enhancement, or CJE, funds.

The money originates from fines and surcharges that are paid by criminals, Rheinheimer said. The state Supreme Court gives the money to the state Attorney General’s Office, and it is then passed on to county attorneys for use in “extraordinary prosecutions.”

The funds come in on an annual basis, but county attorney offices are allowed to keep any funds that are not spent in past years. There is currently about $400,000 in CJE money available to the county, Rheinheimer said.

Also, the County Attorney’s Office has about $200,000 in its Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations accounts. But Rheinheimer does not anticipate exhausting the CJE funds and needing to use RICO money.

The Border Patrol Union’s Web site says lead prosecutor Grant Woods is “Cochise County’s quarter-million dollar man.”

Rheinheimer said the final bills for the first trial are not available yet, but based on estimates, he would be “surprised” if the total is even half of that $250,000 amount.

Woods has agreed to work pro bono on the preparation for the second trial, but he will be paid during the trial time, Rheinheimer said. Woods and his assistant, Tyrone Mitchell, are not profiting on this case because they are putting so much time into it, he added.

“That is one of the reasons why I called Grant to do the case,” Rheinheimer said. “He has done cases for other counties and he does them at greatly reduced rates and he does them as a public service for the counties.”

The Local 2544 National Border Patrol Council in Tucson claims on its Web site that “the taxpayers of Cochise County are getting soaked” by this case.

Rheinheimer stressed the money that is being used does not come out of the county’s general fund and so “it is not taxpayer money.”

The Border Patrol Union’s Web site says: “Although they claim that the money for this pathetic prosecution comes from a ‘special fund,’ they fail to point out that those ‘special funds’ could and should be used to prosecute someone who actually committed a crime.”

But Rheinheimer countered that statement by saying, “There is hardly a more serious crime than murder.”

Sean Chapman, the lead attorney representing Corbett, declined to comment on questions regarding the funding to pay for the defense.

Edward Tuffly, president of Local 2544 National Border Patrol Council in Tucson, said the union is “not backing down” from helping Corbett.

“We are prepared to defend agent Corbett at another trial, and another, and another. We will not stop defending agent Corbett no matter how much money Ed Rheinheimer throws at this prosecution,” he said in a statement.

Tuffly did not respond to a request asking for the amount of money that the union has provided for the defense.

But it is obvious the cost of the defense is expensive.

For example, the defense paid a total of nearly $20,000 to two witnesses who testified during the first trial — and that amount does not include the money they were paid on the days they gave their testimony.

Richard Mason, medical examiner for Santa Cruz County in California, said he received $450 per hour, plus $2,100 to sit in the witness box in court, and he had worked 12 or 13 hours prior to the trial.

Elmer Pellegrino, director of the police academy at Fullerton College in California, said he was retained by the defense at $250 per hour, plus $125, and he had worked 35 to 40 hours prior to the trial.

Woods said the prosecution did not pay any of its witnesses to testify.

Comments

    Tucson BPA wrote on Mar 20, 2008 9:52 PM:

    " This is a witch hunt!!! The FBI cleared this agent from any wrong doing.
    "

    San Diego BPA wrote on Mar 19, 2008 8:33 PM:

    " Corbett, by virtue of union membership can count on the backing of a heavyweight: the Legal Defense Fund of the Peace Officers Research Association of California. They count their cash reserves in the MILLIONS of dollars, and employ the very best legal talent available. They will shell out whatever it takes to defend Corbett at however many trials Reinheimer wants to conduct.

    If it's a battle of economic attrition that the Cochise County Attorneys Office wants to wage against the Tucson Border Patrol Union, it's a battle Reinheimer will lose. "

Write a Comment

Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All readers comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. They review submitted comments periodically during the day for offensive or off-topic content before posting. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. The Douglas Dispatch is not liable for messages from third parties.

DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
* Comments unrelated to the story.
* Personal Information (phone numbers, addresses, etc.)

Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in douglasdispatch.com's reader comments represent the individual's own views and not necessarily those of the Douglas Dispatch. The Douglas Dispatch does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than authorized Douglas Dispatch spokespersons.

Your thoughtful contribution to the online discussion is appreciated.

(optional)
   









Contact Us

Email the Editor
530 11th Street (85607)
P.O. Drawer H
Douglas, AZ 85608
tel: 520.364.3424
fax: 520.364.6750