2015 Ohio 4528
Ohio Ct. App.2015Background
- Varney P. Feemorlu was indicted on two counts of fifth-degree felony drug trafficking; jury trial set for Nov. 13–14, 2014.
- Dawn Ward was appointed counsel for Feemorlu; one day before trial she moved to withdraw citing a newly discovered conflict of interest.
- Ward had been representing the confidential informant (CI) on pending municipal misdemeanors and had discussed those matters with the CI; she also had involvement in another felony where the same CI was a witness.
- Ward told the trial court she had learned information about the CI that would make her uncomfortable and impair her ability to question the CI; the State did not oppose withdrawal.
- The trial court held a same-day hearing, asked limited follow-up questions, denied the motion to withdraw, and the case proceeded to trial; Feemorlu was convicted.
- On appeal Feemorlu argued the denial deprived him of counsel free from conflicts of interest under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments and the Ohio Constitution; the appellate court reversed and remanded for further inquiry or a new trial if an actual conflict is found.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by denying counsel's motion to withdraw for conflict of interest | The State argued no sufficient showing of an actual conflict and the court had discretion to deny withdrawal | Feemorlu (via counsel) argued Ward had a conflict from prior representation of the CI that impaired her ability to represent him and that the court failed to adequately inquire | The court held the trial court did not fulfill its affirmative duty to inquire into whether an actual conflict existed; reversed and remanded for a hearing to determine conflict and, if necessary, a new trial |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Gillard, 64 Ohio St.3d 304 (1992) (trial court must inquire whether an attorney conflict of interest actually exists)
- United States v. Iles, 906 F.2d 1122 (6th Cir. 1990) (procedural goals for substitution inquiry; avoid intruding on privileged communications)
- State v. Keenan, 81 Ohio St.3d 133 (1998) (trial judge has broad latitude in determining actual or potential conflicts)
- State v. Johnson, 185 Ohio App.3d 654 (3d Dist. 2010) (reversed where record lacked inquiry into prior representation of informant; remand for hearing)