Hey guys;

This is a new one for me. SB 1517 amended CCP 1.051(c) regarding indigent access to court-appointed counsel. The bleeding hearts seem to have won one, ironically led by Kel Seliger, my illustrious state senator.

Anyway, I totally get the idea that if another county picks up a defendant and arrests him or her based upon another counties' warrant, and they don't immediately make arrangements to pick said defendant up, etc., that he's entitled to apply for counsel on that counties' case and that county must appoint him counsel for habeaus and bail purposes or the county he's in can and bill the county upon whose warrant he's held. I get that.

My issue/question is this. If the Defendant is arrested on new charge in arresting county, and they find the warrant from issuing county, isn't that Defendant still held to resolve the new charge and discharge himself on that charge before the warrant hold and Defendant's clock running on the warrant even comes into play?

In other words, if arresting county has him on a felony drug charge and he's not bonding on that charge, why would warrant county have any responsibility to appoint that Defendant counsel when we can't even come get him until he's purged himself on the new charge upon which he's being held.

I don't get this, and I don't expect calling Kel's office to be a great help. I need guidance and sage wisdom, so here I R! lol.