After receiving only two Requests for Proposals for legal services, the Silver Springs Stagecoach Hospital District voted unanimously to retain the law firm of Allison, McKenzie, Russell, Pavlakis, Wright & Fagan.

The Hospital District received one other proposal from Bonnie Drinkwater of Drinkwater Law Offices.

At a previous SSSHD meeting, the Board voted unanimously to retain the Carson City firm and did not specifically name attorney Mike Pavalakis in the motion but discussion was centered on him and his work.

Back in February the SSSHD retained Pavalakis to handle a lease agreement with Eastern Sierra Medical Group and other business transactions the District was facing at that time.

Part of the meeting started out with Board member Vicki Aveiro asking how the board would be evaluating the two attorneys, to which, District General Manager Kari Larson suggested the Board review the two resumes and their qualifications.

The Board then took a five minute break to review each resume.

Once the Board was back on record board member Kay Bennett disclosed that she has had a long standing working relationship with Pavalakis and the firm for many years.

She said, "I was responsible for bringing the firm Allison, MacKenzie to Carson Tahoe Hospital and I use the firm Alice and MacKenzie on other matters for my personal business. I don't feel I have a conflict in how ever I would vote on this issue. I would not have any financial or fiduciary benefit."

Board Chairman Mike Langevin added he did see how Bennett would profit or influence the outcome of the Board's vote and he said of her participation in the vote, "I'd say you're good with us."

He then asked fellow board members if they had a problem with Bennett voting on the matter.

Langevin spoke favorably of Pavalakis and reported when called the Carson City attorney on SSSHD matters, Pavalakis responded within a day or within 1-2 hours. "I know what I've dealt with. I'd like to stay with them (Allison, MacKenzie, et al), and have them represent us our board."

Board member Susan Wells remarked that unlike Pavalakis' proposal, Drinkwater did not list her fees. She noted that Pavalakis included his hourly rate, his associate's hourly rate, paralegal fees and other fees.

"I have been impressed with Mike (Pavalakis). I feel he's a straight forward person. He's knowledgeable and willing to help us," she said.

Larson reported to the Board that Pavalakis has given the district $1,979 in free service and that he did not charge the Board for his attendance at the March meeting, but only charged for his assistant's fee.

During discussion the Board did not disclose Pavalakis' fees or any financial impacts it many have on the budget.

Members of the Ukranian Parliament have requested that the Ukrainian Constitutional Court rule on the legality of President Viktor Yushchenko's dismissal of three judges from its bench, according to the court's information office Tuesday. The request came after last Friday's dismissal of Volodymyr Ivashchenko, the third Constitutional Court judge removed for alleged oath and ethics violations.

The court is currently considering the constitutionality of Yushchenko's April 2 decree dissolving parliament and calling for new elections. He has since issued a second decree, which is also under review by the court, moving the elections to late June. A majority of legislators objected to the initial decree, filing an appeal with the 18-judge Constitutional Court.

Yushchenko has insisted that his dissolution decree was proper under the Ukrainian constitution and has said that officials who refuse to comply with his decree could face criminal prosecution.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger submitted a capital punishment proposal Tuesday in an effort to persuade US District Judge Jeremy Fogel to lift a moratorium on executions in the state. The proposal includes the construction of a new execution chamber and a revised protocol on the procedure for lethal injections in the state. Speaking on the plan, Schwarzenegger said that he is "committed to doing whatever it takes to ensure that the lethal injection process is constitutional so the will of the people is upheld."

In December, Schwarzenegger ordered his administration to "correct court-identified deficiencies in California's lethal injection protocol to ensure the death penalty procedure is constitutional" after a federal court issued a memorandum of intended decision concluding that California's lethal injection  procedure creates "an undue and unnecessary risk" of cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution. The memorandum came after the execution of Michael Morales was postponed indefinitely in February 2006 when a court ruling held that medical professionals must monitor executions by lethal injection to be sure that the inmate feels no pain. The ruling imposed a virtual moratorium on executions in California as anesthesiologists refused to take part in the execution.

The appeals court upheld Vang's convictions for six counts of first-degree intentional homicide and three counts of attempted first-degree intentional homicide, agreeing with his attorneys that there was no merit to an appeal.

The fatal shootings occurred in November 2004 after a group of deer hunters in Sawyer County confronted Vang, 38, of St. Paul, Minn., over trespassing in a tree stand.

Vang, a Hmong immigrant and experienced hunter, testified during his trial that he shot the six white hunters and wounded two more in self-defense, claiming one of them fired a shot in his direction after they shouted racial epithets and cursed at him.

The two survivors testified that Vang had begun walking away from the confrontation when he turned and opened fire.

Prosecutors convinced a jury that Vang reacted in an angry outburst, feeling disrespected by the hunters, and then tried to kill everyone so there would be no eyewitnesses.

Vang, who came to the United States from Laos more than 20 years ago, was sentenced to six consecutive life terms plus 165 years in prison. He is being in kept in an undisclosed prison outside of Wisconsin, according to the state Department of Corrections.

The US Supreme Court refused to review the decision of the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit.

A 2005 law, however, allows the detainees to ask the appeals court to check whether the Combatant Status Review Tribunal, created by the Defense Department in 2004, had followed procedures.

During the review tribunals, handcuffed detainees appear without an attorney before three military judges.

Only one person, called a recorder, has access to all elements of a case and presents the documents and witnesses that he or she deems pertinent for the review.

The detainee, meanwhile, can request under certain conditions documents and witnesses, but under such limitations most requests have been rejected.

The government argues that the appeals court can only have access to minutes of the review board hearings and documents presented to the panel.

But detainee attorneys want the court to be able to determine whether the recorder indeed presented all relevant documents for a case and if the military judges were right to reject certain witnesses or documents requested by the detainee.

President George W. Bush's administration has argued that unlawful enemy combatants captured in the "war on terror" do not have the same rights as US criminals or prisoners of war, arguing the detainees are not associated with conventional armies.