2014 Ohio 670
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Stephenson faces murder-related charges stemming from a Jan. 28, 2013 shooting in Columbus.
- Attorney Armengau represented Stephenson and later also represented Pack, who is implicated in the same murder.
- Pack was initially charged in a separate drug case but later indicted on two felony drug possession counts.
- State moved to disqualify Armengau from Stephenson’s defense due to dual representation with Pack.
- Trial court granted the disqualification in May 2013, prompting Stephenson’s appeal.
- Court of Appeals holds that the trial court did not abuse its discretion and affirms the disqualification ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pretrial disqualification for successive representation? | Substantial likelihood of conflict due to Pack's involvement | No demonstrable conflict; discretion should not be abused | No abuse of discretion; disqualification affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (U.S. 1932) (presumption of right to counsel; effectiveness impact)
- Chandler v. Fretag, 348 U.S. 3 (U.S. 1954) (right to choice of counsel; defense fairness)
- Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (U.S. 1975) (constitutional right to self-representation and counsel selection)
- Wheat v. U.S., 486 U.S. 153 (U.S. 1988) (presumption of counsel choice; conflict may overcome presumption)
- State v. Keenan, 81 Ohio St.3d 133 (Ohio 1998) (presumption of right to counsel; conflict can overcome it)
- Moss v. U.S., 323 F.3d 445 (6th Cir. 2003) (conflicts in successive representation; risk of prejudice)
- U.S. v. Agosto, 675 F.2d 965 (8th Cir. 1982) (risk of cross-examination bias when conflicting confidences exist)