|
Ethics Assignment #4
|
|
Question:
|
For this assignment, I'd like to tie together Conflicts of Interest, which we discussed on Thursday, with some criminal procedure law.
One of the fundamental rights afforded criminal defendants is the right to have "effective assistance of counsel." The question is, what happens when a person's lawyer has a conflict of interest? Does that inherently mean that there has been no effective assistance of counsel?
For example, if 2 people are involved in committing a crime, sometimes, the interests of the 2 defendants will conflict with each other. Perhaps both defendants will claim the other one was the "leader." Obviously, in such a case, it would be a conflict of interest for one lawyer to represent them both (because, an argument that's good for one may not be good for the other). But, what if one firm does represent them both anyway and they are convicted, should both convictions be reversed based on lack of effective assistance of counsel? Can you find any case law on this question?
Hint: The U.S. Supreme Court has spoken on this very issue.
|
|
