Vt. attorneys prepare high court case
Toolbox
By PATRICK McARDLE Herald Staff - Published: January 9, 2009
BENNINGTON — The two top attorneys in the Bennington County State's Attorney's office left for Washington, D.C., on Thursday to prepare for argument Tuesday before the U.S. Supreme Court after filing, earlier in the week, the last brief in the case over speedy trial issues.
Bennington County State's Attorney Erica Marthage and Chief Deputy Christina Rainville will be arguing on behalf of the state in the case of Michael Brillon.
The Vermont Supreme Court vacated the June 2004 conviction of Brillon for assaulting a woman with whom he had a relationship. Brillon was in prison serving a sentence of 12 to 20 years at the time.
The state's top court found that the gap between Brillon's arraignment in July 2001 and trial violated his right to a speedy trial but in October, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.
Marthage said on Wednesday that she and Rainville, who is scheduled to deliver the oral argument to the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday, would take part in a moot court hosted by the National Association of Attorneys General today.
"It's quite a prestigious list of D.C. attorneys who do a lot of argument with the (U.S.) Supreme Court," Marthage said.
Also on Friday, Marthage and Rainville will observe a moot court hosted by the office of the solicitor general, which handles all litigation for the United States before the U.S. Supreme Court.
On Monday, the Vermont attorneys will observe the U.S. Supreme Court before presenting their own case at 10 a.m. Tuesday.
Both the state and Middlebury attorney William Nelson, who won the case before the Vermont Supreme Court and continues to represent Brillon, have filed briefs with the U.S. Supreme Court. Amicus curiae briefs have also been filed for both sides.
The briefs, named for the Latin phrase "friend of the court," are filed by interested groups or individuals who are not actual parties in the case.
The state was joined by almost 40 states' attorneys general, more than 15 victims' rights groups, the National Governors' Association and the solicitor general.
Brillon was joined by the American Civil Liberties Union and a group of retired state court judges.
However, because the state is the petitioner before the U.S. Supreme Court, it has the right to file the final petition. On Tuesday, Rainville submitted a brief that refutes arguments made by Nelson and the amicus briefs.
The state's brief said that despite all the legal questions, the case is about justice.
"Simply stated, it would be a perversion of justice to allow a man who threatened the life of his lawyer to walk free because his trial was later delayed due to difficulties in getting or maintaining replacement assigned counsel to represent him. Indeed, such a ruling would send a dangerous message to violent defendants like Brillon, who are already predisposed to use violence to get what they want," Rainville wrote.
One of the attorneys assigned to represent Brillon, Gerald Altieri, told the court that Brillon had threatened him.
Brillon's criminal history includes a 1994 conviction in Bennington County for sexual assault for having sexual contact with a 15-year-old girl.
According to the state, the brief filed by Nelson "grossly misrepresents the record" because Brillon agreed to several requests to continuances in the case.
While briefs in support of Brillon found fault with his appointed counsel and claimed that some of the seven attorneys assigned to represent him did little or nothing to prepare the case for trial, the state's brief pointed out that those attorneys were given no chance to defend their actions.
Rainville's brief maintains that Brillon "intentionally and knowingly" took action to delay his trial.
Nelson could not be reached on Wednesday or Thursday.
Contact Patrick McArdle at patrick.mcardle@rutlandherald.com.
14