Removal of Lawyer with Family Ties Was Improper, Requiring New Trial

The defense lawyer representing an accused murderer was improperly booted from a trial because of a tenuous conflict of interest raised by the state regarding his relationship to a witness’s attorney

People v. Buckhanan, 2016 BL 318182, Ill. App. Ct., 1st Dist., No. 1-13-1097, 9/27/16.

The Illinois Appellate Court ruled that the state improperly removed a defense attorney of an accused murderer because the conflict of interest with another attorney was too tenuous. The state argued that there would be a conflict of interest during the case because the defense attorney was also the son of an attorney that was representing a witness of the prosecution. The state feared that if the relationship was disclosed, it would create the appearance of impropriety during the trial. The court, however, rejected these arguments, finding them to be only speculation and a remote possibility, warranting reversible error. It said, “Such vague and unsupported speculation is insufficient to overcome the constitutional presumption in favor of a defendant's counsel of choice.” The court also pointed to the timing of the removal, finding the decision to be suspect because the prosecution knew for two years of the relationship and still waited until three weeks before the trial to disqualify the defense attorney.

The court conceded the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant, but they still had to reverse the conviction because the Sixth Amendment violation was a structural error, not a harmless-error that can be reviewed.

http://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/document/People_v_Buckhanan_2016_IL_App_1st_131097_Court_Opinion.