United States v. Turner
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 14147
| 7th Cir. | 2011Background
- Turner was convicted by a jury in January 2009 of conspiracy to possess and distribute at least five kilograms of cocaine and at least fifty grams of crack cocaine, and of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking offense.
- Turner had initially retained private counsel (Rueckert) who was disqualified in August 2008 due to a potential conflict of interest.
- A district court disqualified Rueckert after the government highlighted Turner's cash-paid legal fee and potential wealth issues.
- By October 2008, Turner faced a second superseding indictment charging additional quantities and the firearm count.
- Turner testified on his own behalf and was confronted with the government’s evidence and co-defendants’ testimony; closing arguments included credibility attacks and “patsy” theory assertions.
- The district court sentenced Turner to life imprisonment on the cocaine conspiracy count and 60 months on the firearm count, and Turner appeals on two grounds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Right to counsel of choice and court-ordered disqualification | Turner argues the conflict-disqualification violated Sixth Amendment right | Turner argues his personal right was overridden by district court | No reversible error; issue forfeited and plain error not shown |
| Prosecutor’s closing argument and possible misconduct | Turner contends prosecutor invited improper inferences about guilt | Government contends remarks were permissible, supported by evidence | No plain error; arguments within prosecutorial discretion and supported by record |
Key Cases Cited
- Gonzalez-Lopez v. United States, 546 U.S. 257 (U.S. 2006) (right to counsel of choice is fundamental but may be overridden by conflicts of interest)
- Wheat v. United States, 486 U.S. 153 (U.S. 1988) (overriding right to counsel when serious potential for conflict exists)
- United States v. Turner, 594 F.3d 946 (7th Cir. 2010) (conflict-disqualification pretrial decision reviewed for plain error)
- Frady v. Caputo, 456 U.S. 152 (U.S. 1982) (plain error standard requires evident error and prejudice to proceedings)
- United States v. Simpson, 479 F.3d 492 (7th Cir. 2007) (prosecutor’s closing remarks about prior crimes may be improper; objected adverse ruling necessary for review)
- Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78 (U.S. 1935) (prosecutor may not rely on foul means; must avoid impermissible inferences while presenting hard-hitting arguments)