The Colorado Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear an appeal asking whether a defense attorney's personal conflict of interest amounted to ineffective representation that required a reversal of his client's convictions.
Although the Court denied the petition of Dennis Spencer, Justices Monica M. Márquez and William W. Hood III indicated they would have heard the case. The support of three justices is required for the Court to review an appeal.
A Denver jury convicted Spencer in 2002 for multiple sexual assault offenses against three child victims. Spencer went to trial with a private attorney, who at one point attempted to withdraw from Spencer's case. The lawyer claimed Spencer lacked the funds for an investigator and, in what was labeled a "personal conflict," the lawyer was unsure he could adequately defend his client on a sex crimes case given that he had a newborn in his family.
The judge did not allow the attorney to withdraw. Following his conviction, Spencer listed to the district court all of the factors that he considered ineffective representation, including the failure to present a witness who was in the room during one assault and was "a light sleeper," and not investigating a letter from the victim that indicated she may have lied.
A trial judge rejected Spencer's request for relief, finding he failed to show that a conflict existed and, if so, that it negatively affected the lawyer's performance.
Spencer turned to the Court of Appeals, and argued his case should be evaluated against the U.S. Supreme Court's 1980 decision in Cuyler v. Sullivan, which established that a defendant does not necessarily have to show his attorney's conflict of interest resulted in a prejudice against him and deprived him of a fair trial. The appeals court rejected that argument, and believed he should actually have to clear a higher threshold and show the lawyer's performance harmed him.
The Sixth Amendment provides the right to effective assistance of counsel in criminal cases. Ineffective representation can take different forms, and in some cases may be sufficient to reverse a defendant's conviction.
The Supreme Court's denial of Spencer's petition means the appellate ruling stands.
The case is People v. Spencer.
"conflict" - Google News
September 28, 2021 at 05:27AM
https://ift.tt/3idi3St
Justices take pass on appeal alleging lawyer's conflict of interest - coloradopolitics.com
"conflict" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3bZ36xX
https://ift.tt/3aYn0I8
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Justices take pass on appeal alleging lawyer's conflict of interest - coloradopolitics.com"
Post a Comment