1665
|
| Two indigent defendants were tried on capital murder charges in the same jurisdiction (but for unrelated crimes), and both were sentenced to death. The lawyer representing one of the defendants at trial was appointed to represent the other in habeas corpus proceedings, and vice versa. Thus, each lawyer would be asserting an "ineffective assistance of counsel" defense against the other, while defending similar charges. This created a conflict that could be cured by consent (although the "adequacy of disclosure to produce an informed consent imposes a substantial burden on counsel since an inadequate disclosure might itself become a basis for a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel"). If either of the lawyers withdrew, the other may continue because the conflict would disappear. |