Lincoln County Fiscal Court v. Department of Public Advocacy

Respectfully, I dissent.

The heart of the Majority Opinion is its conclusion that “[t]he language of KRS 31.200(3) is clear and unambiguous.” Considered in context, such is not the case.

This is but one subsection of the statutory scheme originally intended to provide for the “defense of indigent persons,” H.B. 461, Ch. 353, Sec. 1,1972, and subsequently expanded to include also “representation of indigent persons accused of ... mental states which may result in their incarceration or confinement.” S.B. 266, Ch. 177, Sec. 1, 1976; now codified as KRS 31.-010(1). In expanding Ch. 31 to cover…