YAKIMA, Wash. -- A state appeals court has sided with the Yakima Herald-Republic in its ongoing quest for access to $2 million in court-appointed attorney billing records in a 2005 double-murder case.

In a 3-0 ruling Thursday, a Division III Court of Appeals panel in Spokane said Yakima County Superior Court Judge James Lust was correct in offering to unseal the records pertaining to Mario Gil Mendez, one of two defendants in the case.

Mendez's attorneys, however, had redacted, or blacked out, large portions of billing records on the grounds such redactions were necessary to protect attorney work product and other privileged information.

After the Herald-Republic complained the redactions were heavy-handed, Lust offered to double-check. Mendez's lawyers then won a stay barring release of the material while they appealed the decision.

"The trial court accurately assessed the situation," Acting Chief Judge Kevin M. Korsmo wrote. "The identity of an attorney's client and the fees charged for representation are not privileged inform-ation. Thus, no privilege attached to the billing records themselves."

Mendez's lawyers were not available for comment, and the immediate effect of the ruling was not clear.

Sarah Wixson, a lawyer for the Herald-Republic, predicted Mendez's lawyers would seek another stay pending appeal to the Washington Supreme Court, which is already considering a related appeal by Mendez's co-defendant.

Even so, she called Thursday's ruling "a good day for transparency."

"It's taken us a long time to get here, and we've got a long ways to go," she said, "but it's a step in the right direction, that's for sure."

The newspaper is seeking billing records submitted by court-appointed attorneys for Mendez and co-defendant Jose Luis Sanchez Jr., who are now serving lengthy prison sentences for the February 2005 shooting deaths of 21-year-old Ricky Causor and his 3-year-old daughter, Mya, during a home invasion robbery in Yakima.

Taxpayer-funded defense costs in the case totaled $560,000 for Mendez and $1.5 million for Sanchez, who was convicted of aggravated first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole. Mendez pleaded guilty to first-degree murder and testified against Sanchez in exchange for a 30-year sentence.

In its ruling, the appeals court said Lust correctly allowed the Herald-Republic to intervene in the case, noting the newspaper waited to do so until after Mendez had already pleaded guilty.

"We believe there is no practical difference between allowing the public to challenge a courtroom closure and allowing the public to challenge a sealing order," Korsmo wrote.

The appeals court pointedly noted, however, that the intent of the sealing order -- to protect the defendant's right to a fair trial -- had to be assumed because the order itself was not included in the record.

A similar dilemma was swiftly resolved earlier this year by the state Supreme Court, shortly after it heard arguments in the related lawsuit involving Sanchez, Mendez's co-defendant.

In that case, the newspaper is pursuing a broader ruling on the confusing nexus between the state's Public Records Act and the extent to which records in a criminal case may be sealed for reasons of privacy and the right to a fair trial.

Sanchez's attorneys contend the records are not administrative in nature, as the paper argues, and instead fall under the jurisdiction of the courts, which are not subject to the Public Records Act.

The newspaper's efforts diverged on appeal due to different legal strategies and because of the circumstances of the defendants themselves. Sanchez is appealing his conviction, while Mendez has no appeal rights because he pleaded guilty.

During oral arguments in March, several justices seemed concerned that not only were the sealing orders themselves sealed but that county officials denied the Herald-Republic's request without having seen them.

Days later, the high court issued a special order requiring the sealing orders be sent to Olympia so the justices could see them for themselves.

The amount of spending by court-appointed attorneys has raised questions that may not be resolved any time soon, as the Supreme Court may not issue a ruling in the Sanchez case until next year.

Among other things, Sanchez's initial defense lawyers, Steve Witchley and Jackie Walsh of Seattle, were accused of unethical conduct and were removed from the case.

The pair was later accused by state Assistant Attorney General John Hillman of wasting a million dollars of public money because a new defense team had to be hired and brought up to speed, which set the case back.

But Hillman said a full investigation would be impossible as long as the court records remain sealed.

* Chris Bristol can be reached at 509-577-7748 or cbristol@yakimaherald.com.