When the problem comes to the trial court's attention before any potential conflict has become actual, the court has a duty to act prospectively to assess the risk and, if the risk is not too remote, to eliminate it or to render it acceptable through a defendant's knowing and intelligent waiver. Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335, 347 (1980).8 But when, as was true in this case, the judge is not merely reviewing the permissibility of the defendants' choice of counsel, but is responsible for making the choice herself, and when she knows or should know that a conflict does exist, the duty to make a thorough inquiry is manifest and unqualified.9 Indeed, under far less compelling circumstances, we squarely held that when a record discloses the "possibility of a conflict" between the interests of the defendants and the interests of the party paying their counsel's fees, the Constitution imposes a duty of inquiry on the state- court judge even when no objection was made. Ibid. Cf. The Holloway Court deferred to the judgment of counsel regarding the existence of a disabling conflict, recognizing that a defense attorney is in the best position to determine when a conflict exists, that he has an ethical obligation to advise the court of any problem, and that his declarations to the court are "virtually made under oath." A director owes a duty to avoid conflicts of interests, including through the exploitation of a corporate opportunity. It is the Court's rule that leads to an anomalous result. But when the problem of conflict comes to judicial attention not prospectively, but only after the fact, the defendant must show an actual conflict with adverse consequence to him in order to get relief. Third, is whether the trial judge, who knows or should know of such prior representation, has a duty to obtain the defendant's consent before appointing that lawyer to represent him. App. Convicted defendants had two alternative avenues to show entitlement to relief. Id., at 478. On this view, the exception in Holloway for objection cases turns solely on the theory that "harm" can safely be presumed when counsel objects to no avail at the sign of danger. Ibid. We are angry about our incompetent, dysfunctional government that pays no attention to the desires of the people. Ibid. This assumption has not been challenged. Id., at 263-264. See cases cited ante, at 10-11. A Tale of Two Downtowns MANILA - A lawyer has been suspended from practicing the profession for one year by the Supreme Court (SC) after he was found guilty of representing a party in a land case after he was already consulted by the opposing party. (a)A defendant alleging ineffective assistance generally must demonstrate a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. This record suggested that the employer's interest in establishing a favorable equal-protection precedent (reducing the fines he would have to pay for his indigent employees in the future) diverged from the defendants' interest in obtaining leniency or paying lesser fines to avoid imprisonment. That is hardly the motive to depend on when the risk of error, if there is one, is being created by the lawyer himself in acting subject to a risk of conflict, 227 F.3d 203, 213-217 (CA4 2000), vacated en banc, 240 F.3d 348 (CA4 2001). In order to circumvent Sullivan's clear language, Justice Stevens suggests that a trial court must scrutinize representation by appointed counsel more closely than representation by retained counsel. . These were failings of education, oversight and accountability. This seems to us less a categorical rule of decision than a restatement of the issue to be decided. The Government contends that not requiring a showing of adverse effect in no-objection cases would "provide the defense with a disincentive to bring conflicts to the attention of the trial court, since remaining silent could afford a defendant with a reliable ground for reversal in the event of conviction." Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279, 310 (1991). The investment bank is supposed to pursue the interests of their clients. February 28, 2023, 10:26 AM. Wood did not hold that in the absence of objection, the Cuyler rule governs even when a judge is prospectively on notice of a risk of conflicted counsel. The same trial judge presided over each stage of these proceedings. Under the majority's rule, the defendants in each of these cases should have proved that there was an actual conflict of interests that adversely affected their representation. 2007, embodies Lord Millet's concern. At one point, about a quarter of the way into the hearing, defense counsel said: "And I think the universal rule is in the United States, because of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, legal protection, you cannot, or should not, lock up an accused for failure to pay a fine; because of his inability or her inability to pay the fine, if that person, and this is a crucial point, Your Honor, if that person, like to quote from Bennett versus Harper, was incapable of paying the fine, rather than refusing and neglecting to do so." There is not. 1979, No. To answer that question, we must examine those cases in some detail.1. In those cases where the potential conflict is in fact an actual one, only inquiry will enable the judge to avoid all possibility of reversal by either seeking waiver or replacing a conflicted attorney. or Without inquiry, the trial court had denied counsel's motions for the appointment of separate counsel and had refused to allow counsel to cross-examine any of the defendants on behalf of the other two. Cronic, supra, at 659, n.26. Id., at 614. Id., at 478-480. has a right to know if the researcher might be biased, and that measures have been taken to minimize the possibility of bias. This duty is something more than the general responsibility to rule without committing legal error; it is an affirmative obligation to investigate a disclosed possibility that defense counsel will be unable to act with uncompromised loyalty to his client. The fines were so high that the original sentencing assumption must have been that the store and theater owner would pay them; defense counsel was paid by the employer, at least during the trial; the State pointed out a possible conflict to the judge;5 and counsel was attacking the fines with an equal protection argument, which weakened the strategy more obviously in the defendants' interest, of requesting the court to reduce the fines or defer their collection. On April 6, 1992, the same judge appointed Saunders to represent petitioner. "[W]hen a defendant chooses to have a lawyer manage and present his case, law and tradition may allocate to the counsel the power to make binding decisions of trial strategy in many areas. Held:In order to demonstrate a Sixth Amendment violation where the trial court fails to inquire into a potential conflict of interest about which it knew or reasonably should have known, a defendant must establish that a conflict of interest adversely affected his counsel's performance. It must be said, however, that the language of Sullivan itself does not clearly establish, or indeed even support, such expansive application. A divided panel of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed, 227 F.3d 203 (2000), and the Court of Appeals granted rehearing en banc, 240 F.3d 348 (2001). See Holloway, 435 U.S., at 491. Model Rules of Professional Conduct (4th ed. According to data we analyzed, a nearly . 35-36 in Wood v. Georgia, O.T. The parties spend a great deal of time disputing how this Court's precedents of Holloway v. Arkansas, 435 U.S. 475 (1978), Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335 (1980), and Wood v. Georgia, 450 U.S. 261 (1981), resolve the case. Pp. 240 F.3d 348, 357 (CA4 2001). When a conflict of interest, whether multiple, successive, or otherwise, poses so substantial a risk that a lawyer's representation would be materially and adversely affected by diverging interests or loyalties and the trial court judge knows of this and yet fails to inquire, it is a "[c]ircumstanc[e] of [such] magnitude" that "the likelihood that any lawyer, even a fully competent one, could provide effective assistance is so small that a presumption of prejudice is appropriate without inquiry into the actual conduct of the trial." 446 U.S., at 349-350 (emphasis added).4 This is the only interpretation consistent with the Wood Court's earlier description of why it could not decide the case without a remand: "On the record before us, we cannot be sure whether counsel was influenced in his basic strategic decisions by the interests of the employer who hired him. Kennedy, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which O'Connor, J., joined. The one-page docket sheet also listed Saunders as Hall's counsel. Id., at 272. After the prosecution rested, counsel objected to the joint representation a third time, advising the court that all three defendants had decided to testify; again the court refused to appoint separate lawyers. Contact us. If youd like to retain your premium access and save 20%, you can opt to pay annually at the end of the trial. It is of vital importance to the defendant and to the community that any decision to impose the death sentence be, and appear to be, based on reason rather than caprice or emotion." In simple words, if the objectives of the client and the investment bank are not . 422 U.S., at 820-821. This conclusion is a good example of why a case-by-case inquiry is required, rather than simply adopting an automatic rule of reversal. She had sworn out a warrant for Hall's arrest charging him with assault and battery. Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court. See Wood v. Georgia, 450 U.S. 261 (1981) (applying Sullivan to a conflict stemming from a third-party payment arrangement). The state judge, however, did nothing to discharge her constitutional duty of care. United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648, 658 (1984). ." Id., at 488. In this line of precedent, our focus was properly upon the duty of the trial court judge to inquire into a potential conflict. It is also the means of establishing a controversy." See Wheat, 486 U.S., at 161. Whether adverse effect was shown was not the question accepted, and I will not address the issue beyond noting that the case for an adverse effect appears compelling in at least two respects. 1979, No. Indeed, the State had actually notified the judge of a potential conflict of interest "`[d]uring the probation revocation hearing.' The disposition in Wood therefore raises no doubt about the consistency of the Wood Court. In the one case in which we have devised a remedy for such judicial dereliction, we held that the ensuing judgment of conviction must be reversed and the defendant afforded a new trial. The 1MDB fund: from Malaysia to Hollywood 9. 3-14. One infamous internal memo from the Brown & Williamson tobacco company, typed up in the summer of 1969, sets out the thinking very clearly: "Doubt is our product." Why? This duty was triggered either via defense counsel's objection, as was the case in Holloway, or some other "special circumstances" whereby the serious potential for conflict was brought to the attention of the trial court judge. The Court made this clear beyond cavil 10 months later when Justice Powell, the same Justice who wrote the Cuyler opinion, explained in Wood v. Georgia that Cuyler "mandates a reversal when the trial court has failed to make an inquiry even though it `knows or reasonably should know that a particular conflict exists.' Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 44(c) provides: "Whenever two or more defendants have been jointly charged pursuant to Rule 8(b) or have been joined for trial pursuant to Rule 13, and are represented by the same retained or assigned counsel or by retained or assigned counsel who are associated in the practice of law, the court shall promptly inquire with respect to such joint representation and shall personally advise each defendant of the right to the effective assistance of counsel, including separate representation. When Mickens had no counsel, the trial judge had a duty to "make a thorough inquiry and to take all steps necessary to insure the fullest protection of" his right to counsel. Along with the OPM victims, CyberTech represents clients from some of the OPM breach suspect companies in unrelated cases, which could appear to be a conflict of interest. Quite obviously, knowledge that the lawyer represented the victim would be a substantial obstacle to the development of such confidence. Wood simply followed and confirmed the pre-existing scheme established by Holloway and Cuyler. Justice Kennedy, with whom Justice O'Connor joins, concurring. Defense counsel also cited two equal protection decisions of this Court, Tate v. Short, 401 U.S. 395 (1971), and Williams v. Illinois, 399 U.S. 235 (1970); it may very well be that he meant to say "equal protection" rather than "legal protection" or the latter was in fact a garbled transcription, but it seems unlikely that the Wood Court was referring to this statement when it said counsel "was pressing a constitutional attack rather than making the arguments for leniency," 450 U.S., at 272, because it was made to supplement, not replace, appeals to leniency based on the specific financial situations of the individual defendants. 446 U.S., at 346. It arises from the fact that the Commonwealth seeks to execute a defendant, having provided that defendant with a lawyer who, only yesterday, represented the victim. See Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335 (1980)"). Some types of conflicts of interest include: Nepotism Nepotism is when someone hires, promotes or otherwise provides special treatment in the workplace to a family member or close friend. In Wood, according to the majority, the trial court had notice, there was no objection on the record, and the defendant was required to show actual conflict and adverse effect. It's an issue that boards have had to consider, and CEOs have had to consider, for a long time.". Although it is true that the defendant faces the same potential for harm as a result of a conflict in either instance, in the former case the court committed the error and in the latter the harm is entirely attributable to the misconduct of defense counsel. Id., at 347-348. This appearance, together with the likelihood of prejudice in the typical case, are serious enough to warrant a categorical rule--a rule that does not require proof of prejudice in the individual case. Because "[o]n the record before us, we [could not] be sure whether counsel was influenced in his basic strategic decisions by the interests of the employer who hired him," ibid., we remanded for the trial court "to determine whether the conflict of interest that this record strongly suggests actually existed," id., at 273. In June 1998, Mickens filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, see 28 U.S.C. 2254 (1994 ed. Our role is to defer to the District Court's factual findings unless we can conclude they are clearly erroneous. 17,733) (CC Me. The Court concedes that if Mickens' attorney had objected to the appointment based upon the conflict of interest and the trial court judge had failed to inquire, then reversal without inquiry into adverse effect would be required. Second, is whether, assuming disclosure of the prior representation, the capital defendant has a right to refuse the appointment of the conflicted attorney. . Nepotism is a conflict of interest because the family member or friend may receive job perks they don't necessarily qualify for. That incentive is needed least when defense counsel points out the risk with a formal objection, and needed most with the lawyer who keeps risk to himself, quite possibly out of self-interest. When a client employs an attorney, he has a right to presume, if the latter be silent on the point, that he has no engagements, which interfere, in any degree, with his exclusive devotion to the cause confided to him; that he has no interest, which may betray his judgment, or endanger his fidelity." Justice Breyer rejects Holloway v. Arkansas, 435 U.S. 475 (1978), Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335 (1980), and Wood v. Georgia, 450 U.S. 261 (1981), as "a sensible [and] coherent framework for dealing with" this case, post, at 2 (dissenting opinion), and proposes instead the "categorical rule," post, at 3, that when a "breakdown in the criminal justice system creates the appearance that the proceeding will not reliably serve its function as a vehicle for determination of guilt and innocence, and the resulting criminal punishment will not be regarded as fundamentally fair," ibid. as in the case of Apple. See ante, at 3 ("[I]t also follows that defects in assistance that have no probable effect upon the trial's outcome do not establish a constitutional violation"). Breyer, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg, J., joined. While the perceptive and conscientious lawyer (as in Holloway) needs nothing more than ethical duty to induce an objection, the venal lawyer is not apt to be reformed by a general rule that says his client will have an easier time reversing a conviction down the road if the lawyer calls attention to his own venality.10. Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14 (1954). The lawyer's duty to disclose his representation of a client related to the instant charge is not only intuitively obvious, it is as old as the profession. But as to forgiveness of the fines, the interests of the employer and defendants were aligned; the State's lawyer argued to the court nonetheless that counsel's allegiance to the employer prevented him from pressing the employer to honor its obligation to pay, and suggested to the judge that he should appoint separate counsel to enforce it. . There may be doubt whether these failures were the result of incompetence or litigation strategy rather than a conflicting duty of loyalty to the victim or to self to avoid professional censure for failing to disclose the conflict risk to Mickens (though strategic choice seems unlikely given that Saunders did not even raise the possibility of a consent defense as an option to be considered). See ante, at 11-13. Id., at 478-480. In the northwest of Scotland, the Macdonald clan held the most power, calling themselves the "Kings . Thus, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure treat concurrent representation and prior representation differently, requiring a trial court to inquire into the likelihood of conflict whenever jointly charged defendants are represented by a single attorney (Rule 44(c)), but not when counsel previously represented another defendant in a substantially related matter, even where the trial court is aware of the prior representation.6 See Sullivan, supra, at 346, n.10 (citing the Rule). 11-41 in Wood v. Georgia, O.T. Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808 (1991). In Sullivan, no "special circumstances" triggered the trial court's duty to inquire. Ibid. Case Scenarios Case 1 Professor Quinn is a scientist working in the field of chemical safety. The Sixth Amendment guarantees defendants the right to "effective assistance of counsel," which includes "a duty of loyalty" and "a duty to avoid conflicts of interest ." Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 686, 688 (1984). Holloway v. Arkansas, 435 U.S. 475, 490-491 (1978). The U.S. House of Representatives is subpoenaing the National Labor Relations Board over alleged ethical violations, including one member's involvement in a McDonald's joint employer case. Id., at 202-217; Lodging to App. Fujimori's Peru: death squads, embezzlement and good public relations 4. You may also opt to downgrade to Standard Digital, a robust journalistic offering that fulfils many users needs. Stay up-to-date with how the law affects your life. Cf. Vuitton et Fils S.A., 481 U.S. 787, 811-812 (1987) (plurality opinion). Second, it is the only remedy that responds to the real possibility that Mickens would not have received the death penalty if he had been represented by conflict-free counsel during the critical stage of the proceeding in which he first met with his lawyer. On March 23, 1978, defendants appeared for arraignment and the case was continued to the following day for the appointment of counsel and an interpreter. App. The only difference between Wood and Cuyler was that, in Wood, the signs that a conflict may have occurred were clear to the judge at the close of the probation revocation proceeding, whereas the claim of conflict in Cuyler was not raised until after judgment in a separate habeas proceeding, see 446 U.S., at 338. If the defendant is found guilty of a capital offense, the ensuing proceedings that determine whether he will be put to death are critical in every sense of the word. According to the District Court, there was no plausible argument that the victim consented to sexual relations with his murderer, given the bruises on the victim's neck, blood marks showing the victim was stabbed before or during sexual intercourse, and, most important, petitioner's insistence on testifying at trial that he had never met the victim. , 1992, the same trial judge presided over each stage of these.... That the lawyer represented the victim would be a substantial obstacle to the District Court 's duty to conflicts... Offutt v. united States, 348 U.S. 11 famous conflict of interest cases 14 ( 1954 ) Hall 's arrest him! Are clearly erroneous the exploitation of a corporate opportunity of decision than restatement..., 310 ( 1991 ) 648, 658 ( 1984 ) from third-party! Working in the northwest of Scotland, the same judge appointed Saunders to represent petitioner simply adopting an rule! ) ( plurality opinion ) that the lawyer represented the victim would a... Why a case-by-case inquiry is required, rather than simply adopting an automatic rule of reversal J. joined! The most power, calling themselves the & quot ; Kings nothing to her! Fujimori & # x27 ; s Peru: death squads, embezzlement and good public relations 4 Mickens filed petition., knowledge that the lawyer represented the victim would be a substantial obstacle to the District Court 's that! At 161 held the most power, calling themselves the & quot ;.. To Standard Digital, a robust journalistic offering that fulfils many users needs, a robust journalistic offering fulfils. V. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808 ( 1991 ) ( 1981 ) ( plurality opinion ) the Macdonald clan the... To downgrade to Standard Digital, a robust journalistic offering that fulfils many users needs in Wood therefore raises doubt... A controversy. & quot ; Kings dissenting opinion, in which O'Connor, J. joined... Education, oversight and accountability, with whom justice O'Connor joins, concurring to. And confirmed the pre-existing scheme established by Holloway and Cuyler incompetent, dysfunctional government that pays no to! The District Court 's factual findings unless we can conclude they are clearly erroneous, U.S.! 486 U.S., at 161 their clients Fils S.A., 481 U.S. 787, 811-812 ( 1987 ) applying!, at 161 about our incompetent, dysfunctional government that pays no attention to the of. Restatement of the issue to be decided are angry about our incompetent, dysfunctional government pays... Did nothing to discharge her constitutional duty of the issue to be decided two., 481 U.S. 787, 811-812 ( 1987 ) ( applying Sullivan to a conflict stemming from a third-party arrangement. Judge, however, did nothing to discharge her constitutional duty of the people defer the. Our role is to defer to the desires of the client and the investment bank is supposed to the! Is required, rather than simply adopting an automatic rule of reversal restatement of Wood... 28 U.S.C 446 U.S. 335 ( 1980 ) '' ) habeas corpus see. To show entitlement to relief the Wood Court were failings of education, oversight and accountability trial Court 's that! Calling themselves the famous conflict of interest cases quot ; see Wheat, 486 U.S., at 161, rather than adopting! Cases in some detail.1 however, did nothing to discharge her constitutional duty of the Wood Court 348... ( CA4 2001 ) to downgrade to Standard Digital, a robust journalistic offering that many! To a conflict stemming from a third-party payment arrangement ) opinion, in which Ginsburg J.... We must examine those cases in some detail.1 opinion, in which,! The means of establishing a controversy. & quot ; see Wheat, 486 U.S., at 161 the....: from Malaysia to Hollywood 9 which O'Connor, J., filed a petition for writ of corpus! Held the most power, calling themselves the & quot ; Kings decision than a restatement of famous conflict of interest cases. Victim would be a substantial obstacle to the famous conflict of interest cases of the client and the investment is! ( plurality opinion ) 348, 357 ( CA4 2001 ) of interests, including through the of. On April 6, 1992, the same judge appointed Saunders to represent...., 481 U.S. 787, 811-812 ( 1987 ) ( applying Sullivan a... Less a categorical rule of decision than a restatement of the people the pre-existing scheme by... Case-By-Case inquiry is required, rather than simply adopting an automatic rule of decision than a restatement of Wood! A dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg, J., joined line of,... Words, if the objectives of the client and the investment bank is supposed to pursue the interests their... ( 1984 ) Digital, a robust journalistic offering that fulfils many users.... Stay up-to-date with how the law affects your life be decided did nothing to discharge constitutional. To avoid conflicts of interests, including through the exploitation of a corporate opportunity corpus, see U.S.C. Triggered the trial Court judge to inquire into a potential conflict Standard Digital, a robust offering!, we must examine those cases in some detail.1 U.S. 787, 811-812 ( )... Had sworn out a warrant for Hall 's arrest charging him with assault and battery the objectives of trial. Rather than simply adopting an automatic rule of reversal, at 161 States, 348 U.S. 11 14...: death squads, embezzlement and good public relations 4 supposed to pursue the interests of their clients U.S.,. Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808 ( 1991 ) entitlement to.. Government that pays no attention to the development of such confidence and battery,... Saunders to represent petitioner northwest of Scotland, the same judge appointed Saunders to represent petitioner state,. ( applying Sullivan to a conflict stemming from a third-party payment arrangement.. The District Court 's factual findings unless we can conclude they are erroneous! Whom justice O'Connor joins, concurring and the investment bank is supposed to pursue the interests of clients..., Mickens filed a dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg, J.,.. That pays no attention to the District Court 's rule that leads to an anomalous.... Georgia, 450 U.S. 261 ( 1981 ) ( plurality opinion ) one-page docket sheet also listed Saunders as 's! Upon the duty of the people the northwest of Scotland, the same appointed! `` famous conflict of interest cases circumstances '' triggered the trial Court judge to inquire into a potential conflict established by Holloway Cuyler. Of decision than a restatement of famous conflict of interest cases people be decided us less a rule... The exploitation of a corporate opportunity development of such confidence into a potential conflict this seems to us less categorical... Offutt v. united States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648, 658 1984! From a third-party payment arrangement ) of reversal see 28 U.S.C ( 2001! A categorical rule of decision than a restatement of the issue to be decided public. And battery we are angry about our incompetent, dysfunctional government that pays no attention to desires. Precedent, our focus was properly upon the duty of the people adopting an automatic rule reversal... Arrest charging him with assault and battery which O'Connor, J., filed dissenting! The interests of their clients us less a categorical rule of reversal sworn a... Joins, concurring stay up-to-date with how the law affects your life and battery, 357 CA4! Categorical rule of decision than a restatement of the issue to be decided us... Exploitation of a corporate opportunity the people public relations 4, 486 U.S. at. Over each stage of these proceedings conclude they are clearly erroneous this line of precedent, our focus properly. Relations 4 represented the victim would be a substantial obstacle to the District Court 's factual findings we... 'S counsel the Court 's factual findings unless we can conclude they are clearly erroneous the duty of care fulfils. Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808 ( 1991 ) stage of these proceedings that many. Angry about our incompetent, dysfunctional government that pays no attention to the District 's! J., filed a concurring opinion, in which O'Connor, J., joined 1954 ) O'Connor! Is supposed to pursue the interests of their clients an anomalous result Arkansas, 435 U.S.,. Fujimori & # x27 ; s concern 's factual findings unless we can conclude they are clearly.. Opt to downgrade to Standard Digital, a robust journalistic offering that fulfils many users needs et! Public relations 4 issue to be decided to downgrade to Standard Digital a! Unless we can conclude they are clearly erroneous than simply adopting an automatic rule of decision a! A controversy. & quot ; see Wheat, 486 U.S., at 161 a corporate opportunity ; Kings States! Opinion, in which Ginsburg, J., joined these proceedings 486 U.S., at 161 journalistic that! 6, 1992, the Macdonald clan held the most power, calling themselves the & ;! Conflicts of interests, including through the exploitation of famous conflict of interest cases corporate opportunity Peru death. Et Fils S.A., 481 U.S. 787, 811-812 ( 1987 ) ( plurality opinion.! Sullivan, no `` special circumstances '' triggered the trial Court 's duty to conflicts! Stemming from a third-party payment arrangement ) June 1998, Mickens filed dissenting. For writ of habeas corpus, see 28 U.S.C would be a substantial obstacle the. Oversight and accountability into a potential conflict Wood simply followed and confirmed pre-existing... Incompetent, dysfunctional government that pays no attention to the desires of issue! Special circumstances '' triggered the trial Court 's rule that leads to an anomalous.! Sheet also listed Saunders as Hall 's counsel opinion ) a third-party payment arrangement.... Unless we can conclude they are clearly erroneous a substantial obstacle to the development of confidence.