Actual Conflict Of Interest

247 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Bush v. United States
  765 F.2d 683· 7th Cir.· 1985-06-20 ·cited 6×
  A defendant challenging joint representation must demonstrate an actual conflict of interest that adversely affected the lawyer's performance.
• United States v. Peeler
  738 F.2d 246· 8th Cir.· 1984-06-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to vacate his sentence without an evidentiary hearing, as the files and records conclusively showed he was entitled to no relief.
• Wilson v. Morris
  724 F.2d 591· 7th Cir.· 1984-01-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a joint preliminary examination over defense objection does not automatically require reversal if no actual conflict of interest adversely affected counsel's performance.
• Briguglio v. United States
  675 F.2d 81· 3d Cir.· 1982-04-02 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the petitioner was entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his claims of an actual conflict of interest by his trial counsel.
• Small v. Superintendent Jeff Endicott & Kenosha Cnty. Cir. Court
  998 F.2d 411· 7th Cir.· 1993-06-22 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the habeas corpus petition under Rule 4 because the petitioner failed to state a claim for relief on any of his grounds.
• Merrill E. Fields v. Attorney Gen. OF the State OF Md.
  956 F.2d 1290· 4th Cir.· 1992-02-26 ·cited 5×
  A voluntary and intelligent guilty plea generally bars collateral review of antecedent constitutional claims, and the defendant failed to demonstrate prejudice or an actual conflict of interest for his ineffective assistance of counsel claim.
• Koch v. Puckett
  907 F.2d 524· 5th Cir.· 1990-08-02 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the petitioner's conclusory allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel, conflict of interest, perjured testimony, and prosecutorial misconduct did not warrant habeas relief or an evidentiary hearing.
• Flaherty v. State
  221 So. 3d 633· Fla. 4th DCA· 2017-05-10 ·cited 4×
  A defendant's trial counsel was revealed post-conviction to be the same prosecutor who had initially charged him. The appellate court declined to adopt a per se rule requiring reversal, instead applying the Cuyler/Hunter test requiring proof that the conflict of interest actually
• Yancy B. Clayton v. State
  12 So. 3d 1259· Fla. 2d DCA· 2009-06-26 ·cited 4×
  Yancy Clayton appeals the summary denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction relief motion claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. The court reverses, finding that the trial judge's prior prosecution of Clayton sufficiently supports a disqualification motion and that the postcon
• Hunter v. State
  770 So. 2d 232· Fla. 4th DCA· 2000-10-25 ·cited 4×
  Hunter challenges the trial court's denial of the public defender's motion to withdraw based on a conflict of interest. The court held that no prejudicial conflict existed where the public defender represented Hunter in a robbery case but had formerly represented Duvall, whose fi
• United States v. Cherie Brown
  991 F.2d 1162· 3d Cir.· 1993-04-30 ·cited 4×
  A sentencing judge has the authority under the current version of the Sentencing Guidelines to permit a defendant to attack the constitutionality of prior convictions used for career offender classification.
• Muhammed Dawan v. A.L. Lockhart
  980 F.2d 470· 8th Cir.· 1992-12-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner is excused from procedural defaults due to ineffective assistance of counsel, which constitutes cause and prejudice for raising his claim.
• United States v. Elic L. Gilliam
  975 F.2d 1050· 4th Cir.· 1992-09-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court was not required to conduct a Rule 44(c) hearing at sentencing when the alleged conflict arose at trial and was not known or reasonably knowable by the court at that time.
• Liss v. United States
  915 F.2d 287· 7th Cir.· 1990-10-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a defendant is not entitled to a hearing on a § 2255 motion if the claims are meritless or could have been raised on direct appeal without cause and prejudice.
• Racheal E. Main v. State
  557 So. 2d 946· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-03-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that joint representation of codefendants by a single attorney constituted reversible error when an actual conflict of interest existed, prejudicing one of the defendants.
• United States v. Heller C. Boling
  869 F.2d 965· 6th Cir.· 1989-03-15 ·cited 4×
• Boutwell v. State
  530 So. 2d 1092· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-09-15 ·cited 4×
  Kenneth Boutwell appeals his conviction for first-degree murder and firearm possession, contending that his trial counsel had an impermissible conflict of interest by representing both Boutwell and a state witness, that this denied him effective assistance of counsel, and that th
• Ford v. Ford
  749 F.2d 681· 11th Cir.· 1985-01-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that an actual conflict of interest existed due to dual representation of co-defendants with divergent interests, violating the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.
• Lace v. United States
  736 F.2d 48· 2d Cir.· 1984-06-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court's finding that the attorney did not represent his brother was clearly erroneous, requiring remand for reconsideration of the ineffective assistance of counsel claim.
• United States v. Knight
  680 F.2d 470· 6th Cir.· 1982-06-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a defendant must establish an actual conflict of interest that adversely affected their lawyer's performance to prove a Sixth Amendment violation.
• Managed Care Ins. Consultants, Inc. v. United Healthcare Ins. Co.
  228 So. 3d 588· Fla. 4th DCA· 2017-10-04 ·cited 3×
  MCIC appealed a trial court order denying its motion to vacate an arbitration award against United Healthcare. MCIC claimed the arbitration panel's chairperson was biased because her husband's medical practice had a business relationship with United Healthcare, which was not disc
• Jones v. McNeil
  776 F. Supp. 2d 1323· S.D. Fla.· 2011-03-07 ·cited 3×
  The court denied the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, finding that the claims were either procedurally barred, meritless, or not contrary to clearly established federal law.
• State v. DE LA OSA
  28 So. 3d 201· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-02-24 ·cited 3×
  Florida's State Attorney sought to disqualify the defendant's chosen counsel, Teresa Williams, a former assistant statewide prosecutor, based on her prior work with a task force investigating hundreds of individuals. The Fourth District Court of Appeal denied the state's petition
• Taylor v. United States
  985 F.2d 844· 6th Cir.· 1993-01-28 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the defendant failed to establish a conflict of interest, ineffective assistance of counsel, or improper jury selection, and thus, his motion to vacate his sentence was properly denied.
• Porter v. Dugger
  805 F. Supp. 941· M.D. Fla.· 1992-10-30 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the petitioner received effective assistance of counsel at both sentencing hearings and that no actual conflict of interest existed, denying habeas corpus relief.
• United States v. Urbana
  770 F. Supp. 1552· S.D. Fla.· 1991-05-10 ·cited 3×
  A district court must disqualify counsel when there is a reasonable possibility of impropriety and the likelihood of public suspicion outweighs the social interests served by the lawyer's continued participation, even if the defendant waives the conflict.
• United States v. William "Billy" Panasuk
  693 F.2d 1078· 11th Cir.· 1982-12-16 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the petitioner did not establish an actual conflict of interest that adversely affected his counsel's performance, thus denying his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Muldowney v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Sarasota County)
  2015 WL 4651090· M.D. Fla.· 2024-08-26 ·cited 2×
  The federal district court sua sponte raised concerns about a potential conflict of interest where petitioner's counsel represented him in both state post-conviction Rule 3.850 proceedings and the present federal habeas corpus action. The court stayed the proceedings and ordered
• Rutledge v. State
  150 So. 3d 830· Fla. 4th DCA· 2014-10-29 ·cited 2×
  Eddie Rutledge was convicted of first-degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder, but the appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial because his trial court failed to conduct any inquiry into a potential conflict of interest when his defense attorney disclosed that
• Keyes v. State
  95 So. 3d 280· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-06-20 ·cited 2×
  Howard Keyes challenged his first-degree murder conviction on grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel, alleging his public defender labored under a conflict of interest because the office had represented state witnesses, failed to request a voluntary intoxication instruction
• Cole v. State
  35 So. 3d 173· Fla. 2d DCA· 2010-06-02 ·cited 2×
  Norman Cole appealed the denial of his Rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel based on conflicts of interest, involuntary plea, and failure to file evidentiary motions. The appellate court reversed the summary denials of several gr
• Cadejuste v. State
  993 So. 2d 122· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-10-22 ·cited 2×
  Marco Cadejuste appealed his conviction, raising claims about attorney conflict of interest and Miranda violations. The court reversed and remanded due to the trial court's failure to address a conflict of interest when the same attorney who previously withdrew due to conflicts o
• THE Florida BAR v. Brown
  978 So. 2d 107· Fla.· 2008-01-17 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Bar disciplined attorney Anna L. Brown for violating professional conduct rules by representing two clients with directly adverse interests, failing to diligently represent and communicate with one client, and engaging in misrepresentation about the scope of her repre
• Blackwood v. State
  755 So. 2d 699· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-08-04 ·cited 2×
  Arnold Blackwood appeals the denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea to aggravated battery. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that once a public defender moves to withdraw due to a conflict of interest, the trial court must appoint conflict-free coun
• Beets v. Collins
  986 F.2d 1478· 5th Cir.· 1993-03-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the lawyer's decision not to testify, which could have aided the defense, constituted an adverse effect under the Cuyler standard, even if it didn't prove actual prejudice.
• Cates v. Superintendent, Ind. Youth Ctr.
  981 F.2d 949· 7th Cir.· 1992-12-11 ·cited 2×
  Joint representation of co-defendants does not violate the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel unless the defendant demonstrates an actual conflict of interest that adversely affected counsel's performance. A voluntary and intelligent guilty plea waives prior
• James v. Pierce
  976 F.2d 369· 7th Cir.· 1992-10-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to vacate the sentence, as the defendant failed to demonstrate an actual conflict of interest adversely affecting his counsel's performance and waived other claims through procedural default.
• Jamison v. A.L. Lockhart
  975 F.2d 1377· 8th Cir.· 1992-09-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an alleged conflict of interest by trial counsel could constitute sufficient cause to excuse a procedural default in raising an ineffective assistance of counsel claim.
• United States v. Miskinis
  966 F.2d 1263· 9th Cir.· 1992-04-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the federal "kingpin" statute (21 U.S.C. § 848) can apply to an individual whose criminal conduct consists solely of aiding and abetting others, provided that individual is otherwise a kingpin and the aided conduct qualifies under the statute. The court also f
• Elcock v. Henderson
  947 F.2d 1004· 2d Cir.· 1991-10-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while a due process violation occurred due to appellate delay, unconditional release was not warranted without a showing of prejudice to the appeal's outcome. The Sixth Amendment claim based on attorney conflict of interest required further factual findings.
• Strouse v. Leonardo
  928 F.2d 548· 2d Cir.· 1991-03-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner made a sufficient showing to be entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his claim of an actual conflict of interest due to his trial counsel's potential expectation of fees as executor.
• In re Grand Jury Matter (Special Grand Jury Narcotics December Term v. Under Seal
  926 F.2d 348· 4th Cir.· 1991-02-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a grand jury subpoena for attorney fee arrangements does not automatically require a hearing and does not violate the Sixth Amendment or attorney-client privilege unless it implicates confidential communications.
• Pool v. Armontrout
  852 F.2d 372· 8th Cir.· 1988-07-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that claims of prison official interference with appeals are cognizable in habeas corpus if they challenge the fact or length of confinement, but that the appellant failed to show his prior habeas appeal had merit, thus obviating the need for an evidentiary hearing
• Guaraldi v. Cunningham
  819 F.2d 15· 1st Cir.· 1987-05-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant's Sixth Amendment rights were not violated by dual representation without explicit warning, nor by the state's failure to locate a defense witness, as no actual conflict adversely affected performance and no prejudice was shown.
• United States v. Shaughnessy
  782 F.2d 118· 8th Cir.· 1986-01-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant failed to prove an actual conflict of interest or that his counsel's performance was prejudiced by any such conflict.
• Dixson v. Quarles
  781 F.2d 534· 6th Cir.· 1985-12-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate an actual conflict of interest or actual prejudice to her defense, as required by Strickland v. Washington.
• Dean v. Duckworth
  748 F.2d 367· 7th Cir.· 1984-07-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioners' trial counsel did not operate under an actual conflict of interest that adversely affected his performance, and that the other claims for habeas corpus relief were without merit.
• Wright v. State
  442 So. 2d 301· Fla. 5th DCA· 1983-12-01 ·cited 2×
  In this appeal of a joint representation case, the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed convictions of two defendants charged with kidnapping, armed robbery, and sexual assault, finding no actual conflict of interest despite their joint counsel despite their joint coun
• Christian v. Housewright
  721 F.2d 240· 8th Cir.· 1983-11-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while the trial court erred in failing to provide a limiting instruction regarding prior convictions, this error was harmless. Additionally, the court found no ineffective assistance of counsel or actual conflict of interest arising from joint representation.
• Alexander v. Housewright
  667 F.2d 556· 8th Cir.· 1981-12-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant failed to demonstrate an actual conflict of interest affecting his counsel's representation and that the trial court's handling of inflammatory remarks by the victim's mother did not deny him a fair trial.