What is the appropriate standard of review for the forfeiture of attorney's fees?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW A Texas intermediate court of appeals has ruled that a criminal defense attorney does not have a superior right to possess attorney’s fees that may have been stolen by his client without the attorney’s knowledge; that a criminal defense attorney may not challenge a forfeiture of attorney’s fees on behalf of his client; and that it is the attorney, rather than the government, who bears the burden of proof. Petitioner poses the following questions, and seeks this Court’s review: (1) What is the appropriate standard of review to be employed when a court orders the forfeiture of attorney’s fees to the State? (2) Does a criminal defense attorney have a superior right to possession of monies tendered to him by a client as attorney’s fees, though the client may have stolen the funds without the attorney’s knowledge? (83) May a criminal defense attorney assert his client’s Sixth Amendment rights to recoup attorney’s fees seized by the State? (4) Does forfeiture of attorney’s fees from a criminal defense attorney violate the Excessive Fines clause of the Eighth Amendment? ii LIST OF ALL PARTIES Pursuant to Sup. CT. R. 14.1(b), the undersigned counsel of record certifies that the following listed persons have an interest in the outcome of this case: Mr. R. Scott Shearer Attorney for Petitioner Ms. Regina Bacon Criswell Trial counsel for Petitioner Abraham M. Fisch Petitioner. Ms. Markay Stroud Trial counsel for the Ms. Donna Goode State of Texas. Ms. Robyn A. Brown Mr. Daniel C. McRory Appellate counsel State of Texas. Ms. Kim Ogg Harris County District Attorney. Vickram Kumar Patel Beneficiary of the forfeiture orders. Hon. Mark Kent Ellis Presiding judge of the Trial Court. iii