Seen here are a selection of orders filed by Presiding Cullman County District Judge Kim Chaney where he appointed his son, Alex Chaney, to indigent clients before recusing himself and transferring the case to District Judge Wells "Rusty" Turner, citing "a conflict of interest."

Cullman County District Judge Kim Chaney appointed his son defense counsel on dozens of cases before recusing himself and turning them over to another judge, according to a review of a state court database.

In cases where the clients are indigent, the state pays appointed attorneys for billable hours.

Earlier this month, the Alabama Ethics Commission found probable cause the longtime district judge violated the state’s ethics law which prohibits elected officials, public employees, and their families from benefiting from their position. The Alabama Attorney General’s Office is now reviewing the ethics commission’s findings.

The AG’s Office has declined to comment on any pending investigation.

In 61 separate district court cases from 2015-2017, Kim Chaney issued orders appointing his son Alex Chaney counsel, The Times’ review shows. Kim Chaney would then transfer the cases to District Judge Wells “Rusty” Turner due to “a conflict of interest.”

A full case docket is not available for Alex Chaney through the state online court record database, AlaCourt.

The Times’ review found case dockets for other Cullman attorneys acting as defense counsel through AlaCourt, but not for Alex Chaney.

Alabama State Ethics Commission Executive Director Tom Albritton recently told The Times that the complaint against Kim Chaney focuses on the judge allegedly directing criminal appointments — assigning representation of criminal defendants — to Alex Chaney, and his son’s law firm, Berry, Berry, Little, Brunner & Chaney.

Kim Chaney, who is serving in his fifth term, has denied any wrongdoing through his Birmingham attorney, Augusta Dowd, the Alabama Bar Association president.

State finance records show Alex Chaney was paid $118,766.80 in state money from the Fair Trial Tax Fund in fiscal 2016 and $86,406.86 in fiscal 2017.

In September 2015, Cullman attorneys Tommy Drake and Melvin Hasting filed suit challenging the Cullman County Indigent Defense Committee’s handling of case appointments, alleging it selected attorneys with close ties to local judges and favored by committee members.

Hasting alleged the committee awarded annual contracts to two attorneys, Brandon Little and Alex Chaney, in the same law firm, Berry, Berry and Little, netting $94,000.

“It has been made known to the local bar that two attorneys from the same firm will not be awarded contracts when there are others available,” according to Hasting’s motion for a temporary restraining order.

Hasting alleged the committee’s awarding a contract to Alex Chaney was also a conflict of interest because his father is Judge Kim Chaney. All of Alex Chaney’s cases in District Court must be reassigned from Kim Chaney to Turner, along with any cases Brandon Little has.

In 2013, Cullman County’s judicial system switched to a contract attorney system — where attorneys are paid an annual amount regardless of the caseload — from an appointed system where attorneys were paid based on billable hours. Cullman County’s system was modeled after other counties who had successfully created indigent defense programs as required by the state, proponents of the system claimed.

“It only cost around $750,000 to $800,000 a year, and when a client is found guilty, they have to pay back the state the money for their defense,” District Judge Kim Chaney said in 2015. “Around $350,000 to $400,000 is recouped by the state so it’s a much more affordable system.”

After the lawsuit, the county court system returned to an appointed list where attorneys are to be given cases on a rotating basis. In December 2015, the Alabama Office of Indigent Defense Service (OIDS) began requiring presiding circuit judges to approve all contracts negotiated and attorneys selected by local boards.

According to state law and OIDS regulations, each judicial circuit’s indigent defense board is responsible for selecting the “most efficient and effective counsel system available,” either by appointment by a judge, selection of counsel under contract by the board or through a public defender’s office.

Each attorney appointed or selected to provide indigent defense representation must be a member in good standing with the Alabama State Bar and complete a minimum of six hours per year of continuing legal education credits, approved by the Alabama State Bar, in criminal law beginning after the attorney is appointed or selected.

In choosing defense counsel, the following factors are to be taken into account: the amount of criminal litigation experience possessed by the attorney, the degree of familiarity with the Rules of Professional Conduct and the current criminal practice and procedure in Alabama, and whether the attorney has sufficient criminal trial experience in light of the seriousness of criminal charges.

The OIDS also adopted caseload standards for indigent criminal defendants that should not exceed: 200 felony cases per attorney per year, or 400 misdemeanor and traffic offense cases per attorney per year or 200 juvenile offender cases per attorney per year or 100 open juvenile dependency cases per attorney per year, 100 Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) cases per attorney per year or 36 appeals to an appellate court considering a case on a record and on briefs per attorney per year.