A district attorney’s office should not be disqualified from prosecuting a defendant because an assistant district attorney in the office previously represented the defendant when the attorney served as a public defender, the state Superior Court has ruled.
A unanimous three-judge panel on Sept. 2 reversed the Clinton County Court of Common Pleas’ removal of the Clinton County District Attorney’s Office from a drug case, holding that the ADA’s prior representation is a clear conflict of interest but remanding the case to determine whether confidential information was disclosed to the office that would merit its entire removal.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
