People v. Nozolino

Summary

The Colorado Supreme Court reviewed an original proceeding challenging the disqualification of the Office of the State Public Defender from representing Bruce J. Nozolino in a homicide case. The court held that any conflict involving the defendant’s attorneys was, at most, potential and waivable, and that disqualification was not warranted on the record. It made the rule absolute and remanded for an on-the-record advisement and determination of whether Nozolino voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently waives conflict-free representation.

Holdings

1. Any conflict Thompson may have had as a result of being a witness in the perjury case was not imputed to Roy and Chalmers because Thompson withdrew from the homicide case and was screened from it.
2. A defendant may waive the right to conflict-free representation in appropriate circumstances when counsel reasonably believes competent and diligent representation remains possible and the defendant gives informed consent after full disclosure of the potential and existing conflicts.
3. The trial court abused its discretion by disqualifying Roy and Chalmers because the record did not show a direct conflict, actual prejudice, or that disqualification was the only effective remedy; any conflict was potential and waivable.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a conflict of interest involving a Public Defender attorney who was designated as a prosecution witness in a separate case was imputed to the attorneys continuing to represent Nozolino.
2. Whether any conflict affecting Roy or Chalmers was nonwaivable and required disqualification of the Public Defender's office.
3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by disqualifying Nozolino's counsel of choice without finding that continued representation would cause prejudice or that disqualification was the only effective remedy.
4. Whether Nozolino was entitled to an opportunity to make a voluntary, knowing, and intelligent waiver of conflict-free representation.

Disposition

writ_granted