Conflict Of Interest In Legal Representation

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

• LoCONTE v. Dugger
  847 F.2d 745· 11th Cir.· 1988-06-20 ·cited 284×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the petition for habeas corpus relief, as the guilty plea was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, and counsel was not ineffective.
• United States v. Garcia
  517 F.2d 272· 5th Cir.· 1975-08-07 ·cited 198×
  The court held that criminal defendants can knowingly and intelligently waive their Sixth Amendment right to conflict-free representation, even if the trial court believes such conflicts exist.
• Sheppard v. State
  17 So. 3d 275· Fla.· 2009-08-27 ·cited 175×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict between district courts regarding whether a defendant represented by counsel can file a pro se motion to withdraw a guilty plea under Rule 3.170(l) without explicitly requesting discharge of counsel. The Court held that a narrow excep
• Ashe v. McNAMARA
  355 F.2d 277· 1st Cir.· 1965-12-14 ·cited 90×
  A district court has jurisdiction to review administrative action under 10 U.S.C. § 1552, compelling correction of a military discharge if the original conviction was unconstitutional.
• Nelson v. United States
  415 F.2d 483· 5th Cir.· 1969-09-08 ·cited 88×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support a conspiracy conviction, and that the trial court did not err in its rulings on severance, jury instructions, or the denial of a new trial.
• United States v. Alvarez
  580 F.2d 1251· 5th Cir.· 1978-09-28 ·cited 82×
  An attorney operating under an actual conflict of interest deprives a defendant of their Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights to effective assistance of counsel, and reversal is automatic without a showing of prejudice.
• Snelgrove v. State
  921 So. 2d 560· Fla.· 2005-11-10 ·cited 77×
  David Snelgrove was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder and other crimes and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the guilt-phase convictions but reversed the death sentences because the jury rendered a single, undifferentiated advisory sentence rathe
• United States v. Garland Jeffers
  520 F.2d 1256· 7th Cir.· 1975-07-30 ·cited 66×
  The court held that defense counsel's prior representation of a prosecution witness did not create a disqualifying conflict of interest, and that the defendants waived any right to further cross-examination by counsel's failure to make an adequate record or seek alternative couns
• United States v. DiCARLO
  575 F.2d 952· 1st Cir.· 1978-04-20 ·cited 65×
  The court held that the defendants failed to establish a real conflict of interest or actual prejudice from their counsel's actions, and that the government's failure to disclose certain letters did not violate Brady v. Maryland.
• Westbrook v. Zant
  743 F.2d 764· 11th Cir.· 1984-09-21 ·cited 61×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the district court erred by failing to follow the law of the case established in Westbrook I, which mandated granting habeas corpus relief if the petitioner's counsel represented Jones County in the Gibson litigation.
• United States v. Gambino
  788 F.2d 938· 3d Cir.· 1986-04-18 ·cited 60×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that Antonio Gambino was not entrapped as a matter of law and that the district court did not err in proceeding with an eleven-person jury after excusing a juror for cause.
• In re Investigation Before the April 1975 Grand Jury. Appeal of Sol Z. Rosen & Local 6 of The Newspaper & Graphic Commc'n Union
  531 F.2d 600· D.C. Cir.· 1976-02-03 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the District Court lacked sufficient grounds to order separate counsel for grand jury witnesses and vacated the order.
• Mills v. Singletary
  161 F.3d 1273· 11th Cir.· 1998-12-01 ·cited 55×
  Gregory Mills was convicted of first-degree felony murder, burglary, and aggravated battery in the 1979 shooting death of James Wright during a burglary. The jury recommended life imprisonment, but the trial judge overrode that recommendation and imposed a death sentence based on
• In re Grand Jury Subpoena Directing Edward Taylor to Appear & Testify Before a Grand Jury on July 20
  567 F.2d 1183· 2d Cir.· 1977-12-12 ·cited 51×
  The court held that the district court's order disqualifying counsel based on an in camera review of grand jury materials was premature and violated the appellant's constitutional right to counsel of his choice.
• United States v. Darrel Dwayne Youpee
  419 F.2d 1340· 9th Cir.· 1969-12-17 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to withdraw the guilty plea, nor did it err in its compliance with Rule 11 or in denying separate counsel.
• United States v. Loalza-Vasquez
  735 F.2d 153· 5th Cir.· 1984-06-14 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the district court did not err in asserting jurisdiction, admitting hearsay evidence under the residual exception, denying severance, or finding no unconsented conflict of interest.
• Deppe v. Tripp
  863 F.2d 1356· 7th Cir.· 1988-12-21 ·cited 46×
  The court held that a plain error doctrine is not available in civil cases for unpreserved jury instruction or closing argument errors, and has extremely limited application for evidentiary errors. Civil litigants are bound by their counsel's actions.
• United States v. Fahey
  769 F.2d 829· 1st Cir.· 1985-07-30 ·cited 46×
  The court held that a defendant's waiver of a potential conflict of interest with his counsel was knowing and intelligent, and that the search of an unpatented mining claim and seizure of soil samples did not violate the Fourth Amendment. The court also found that a coconspirator
• United States v. Bell
  506 F.2d 207· D.C. Cir.· 1974-11-01 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in admitting rebuttal testimony to impeach the defendant's claim of never having seen narcotics, nor in refusing to require the government to disclose the identity of an informant used in that rebuttal, given the informant's limited
• United States v. Alberti
  470 F.2d 878· 2d Cir.· 1972-12-22 ·cited 44×
  The court held that neither appellant was denied effective assistance of counsel or a fair trial, affirming their convictions.
• In re AOV Indus., Inc.
  792 F.2d 1140· D.C. Cir.· 1986-06-06 ·cited 39×
  The court held that Hawley was subjected to unequal treatment in violation of 11 U.S.C. § 1123(a)(4) by the bankruptcy plan. The dissenting judge would affirm the district court's judgment outright.
• United States v. Curcio
  680 F.2d 881· 2d Cir.· 1982-05-26 ·cited 39×
  The court held that the defendants were not given an adequate opportunity to make a knowing and intelligent waiver of their right to conflict-free representation, vacating the disqualification order.
• Larson & Larson, P.A. v. TSE Indus., Inc.
  22 So. 3d 36· Fla.· 2009-11-05 ·cited 38×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict between district courts regarding when the statute of limitations begins to run on legal malpractice claims in litigation. The court held that malpractice claims based on an underlying judgment accrue when that judgment becomes final,
• United States v. Howton
  688 F.2d 272· 5th Cir.· 1982-09-17 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the defendants knowingly and voluntarily waived their right to conflict-free counsel and that the trial court did not err in its rulings regarding the production of a witness report or the admission of evidence concerning a murder.
• Glavin v. United States
  396 F.2d 725· 9th Cir.· 1968-06-07 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to withdraw counsel, denying the motion to suppress evidence, admitting documents, or in its jury instructions regarding possession of recently stolen property.
• United States v. Elrod
  716 F.2d 431· 7th Cir.· 1983-08-19 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the trial court's explanation of potential conflicts of interest and the petitioner's affirmative response constituted a knowing and intelligent waiver of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel free from such conflicts.
• Vagner v. Louie L. Wainwright
  398 So. 2d 448· Fla.· 1981-05-07 ·cited 36×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that ineffective assistance claims based on inadequacy or incompetence of retained counsel are cognizable grounds for challenging convictions, overruling prior precedent that had barred such claims. The court rejected distinctions between retained a
• Gallagher v. The United States
  423 F.2d 1371· Ct. Cl.· 1970-04-17 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the court-martial had jurisdiction over the offense committed in a foreign country and that the plaintiff was not denied his constitutional right to representation by counsel, as any alleged conflict of interest did not rise to a constitutional level.
• Alphonso Morgan v. United States
  396 F.2d 110· 2d Cir.· 1968-05-21 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a hearing is required to determine if the defendant was deprived of effective assistance of counsel due to a conflict of interest arising from his court-appointed attorney also representing a co-defendant.
• United States v. Rad-O-Lite OF Philadelphia, Inc.
  612 F.2d 740· 3d Cir.· 1979-12-28 ·cited 33×
  The Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel applies to corporate defendants, but the objection must be preserved in the district court. A motion to strike an alias from an indictment is untimely if not raised before trial without good cause.
• Martin v. United States
  256 F.2d 345· 5th Cir.· 1958-06-18 ·cited 33×
  The court held that a guilty plea is voluntary if made with understanding of charges and competent counsel's advice, even if induced by dismissal of a capital count.
• United States v. Soc'y OF Indep. Gasoline Marketers OF Am.
  624 F.2d 461· 4th Cir.· 1979-12-26 ·cited 32×
  The court did not explicitly state a holding in this concurring opinion, but implied agreement with the majority's decision.
• United States v. Colonia
  870 F.2d 1319· 7th Cir.· 1989-03-23 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the defendants' arrests and searches were based on probable cause, their consent to search was voluntary, and their convictions were not affected by minor discrepancies in the indictment language or potential attorney conflicts of interest.
• Emerson W. Dunton, Jr. v. Cnty. OF Suffolk
  729 F.2d 903· 2d Cir.· 1984-02-28 ·cited 30×
  The court held that a conflict of interest arising from joint representation of a police officer and the municipality by the same county attorney prejudiced the officer, requiring a new trial. It also held that federal claims against Angela Pfeiffer were insubstantial, divesting
• United States v. English
  501 F.2d 1254· 7th Cir.· 1974-08-16 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the defendants' convictions were valid, rejecting arguments regarding grand jury minutes, discovery delays, preliminary hearings, speedy trial, confession voluntariness, severance, and judicial bias.
• Hutchinson v. State
  17 So. 3d 696· Fla.· 2009-07-09 ·cited 28×
  Jeffrey Hutchinson appeals the denial of his Rule 3.851 postconviction motion challenging his conviction for four counts of first-degree murder and three death sentences in the shooting deaths of his live-in girlfriend and her three children. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the
• United States v. Henry
  933 F.2d 553· 7th Cir.· 1991-05-29 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the denial of the motion to suppress was not clearly erroneous, the sentencing enhancement was proper, and the prior guilty pleas were valid.
• Ross v. United States
  910 F.2d 1422· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-16 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the United States and the City of Waukegan were properly dismissed, but the claim against Lake County for violating William Ross's constitutional rights by preventing rescue was cognizable under § 1983.
• Dade Cnty. v. Goldstein
  384 So. 2d 183· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-05-13 ·cited 28×
  Dade County petitioned for certiorari to review a trial court order awarding $8,500 each to two court-appointed private attorneys for representing an insolvent criminal defendant after the public defender withdrew due to conflict of interest. The appellate court granted the petit
• United States v. Mahar
  550 F.2d 1005· 5th Cir.· 1977-04-14 ·cited 27×
  The court held that a defendant must affirmatively assert their right to retain counsel with a conflict of interest; failure to do so means the court can disqualify the attorney to ensure independent counsel.
• United States v. Fishbein
  446 F.2d 1201· 9th Cir.· 1971-07-28 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed Fishbein's convictions for conspiracy and securities fraud, vacated others pending probation status, and affirmed Yordon's conspiracy conviction while reversing his securities fraud convictions.
• United States v. Partin
  601 F.2d 1000· 9th Cir.· 1979-05-07 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel was not violated, as he knowingly and intelligently waived his right to conflict-free counsel, and no actual conflict of interest prejudiced him. The court also found no reversible error
• Kaplan v. Bombard
  573 F.2d 708· 2d Cir.· 1978-02-15 ·cited 24×
  The court held that while joint representation is disfavored, the defendant did not suffer sufficient particularized prejudice to warrant a finding of unconstitutional denial of effective assistance of counsel.
• In re the Grand Jury Empaneled January 21
  536 F.2d 1009· 3d Cir.· 1976-06-18 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court's order disqualifying an attorney from representing multiple grand jury witnesses was reversible due to an insufficient evidentiary basis.
• United States v. Kaufman
  429 F.2d 240· 2d Cir.· 1970-07-22 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's convictions for conspiracy and securities fraud, and that various evidentiary and procedural rulings by the trial court were proper.
• Coleman v. McCORMICK
  874 F.2d 1280· 9th Cir.· 1989-05-05 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendant's sentence must be reversed due to procedural issues in place at the time of trial regarding capital punishment hearings.
• United States v. Muench
  694 F.2d 28· 2d Cir.· 1982-11-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that possession of controlled substances within U.S. territory with intent to distribute is a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), regardless of whether the intent is to distribute within or outside the U.S., and regardless of whether the defendant passes through U.
• Jennings v. State
  413 So. 2d 24· Fla.· 1982-04-08 ·cited 22×
  Bryan Jennings was convicted of first-degree murder, kidnapping, and sexual battery in the death of six-year-old Rebecca Kunash and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court vacated the conviction and remanded for a new trial due to Jennings' deprivation of the right to cross
• Landmarks Holding Corp. v. Bermant
  664 F.2d 891· 2d Cir.· 1981-11-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the plaintiff's conduct did not violate the Sherman Act because the judicial processes were not corrupted and the plaintiff had meaningful access to adjudicatory tribunals.
• Randazzo v. United States
  339 F.2d 79· 5th Cir.· 1964-10-21 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a potential conflict of interest existed between the appellant and his co-defendant, requiring the striking of the appellant's counsel. The court also vacated the conviction and remanded for the district court to exercise its discretion regarding sentencing in