From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Salinas

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Jul 8, 1980
618 F.2d 1092 (5th Cir. 1980)

Opinion

No. 79-3376.

April 29, 1980. Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied July 8, 1980.

Samuel H. Bayless (Court-appointed), San Antonio, Tex., for Salinas.

Terrence W. McDonald, (Court-appointed), San Antonio, Tex., for Maldonado.

Le Roy Morgan Jahn, Asst. U.S. Atty., San Antonio, Tex., Vincent F. O'Rourke, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Drew S. Days, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jessica Dunsay Silver, Deputy Chief Asst. Atty. Gen., Appellate Section, Civil Rights Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff-appellee.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas.

Before SIMPSON, HILL and HATCHETT, Circuit Judges.


This case raises the issue of whether a trial judge may disqualify a retained attorney, in a criminal case, where the judge believes that the attorney is the "target" of an investigation concerning the event or events for which his clients were indicted. We affirm the trial judge's order of disqualification.

The right of defendants in criminal cases to retain an attorney of their choice does not outweigh the countervailing public interest in the fair and orderly administration of justice. United States v. Kitchin, 592 F.2d 900 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 100 S.Ct. 86, 62 L.Ed.2d 56 (1979); Gandy v. Alabama, 569 F.2d 1318 (5th Cir. 1978).

Authority clearly supports the right of a trial judge to regulate the conduct of attorneys during the course of a case. United States v. Kitchin; United States v. Dinitz, 538 F.2d 1214 (5th Cir. 1976) (en banc), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1104, 97 S.Ct. 1133, 51 L.Ed.2d 556 (1977).

Our standard of review is whether the trial judge abused his discretion. In re Gopman, 531 F.2d 262 (5th Cir. 1976). We agree that the trial "court's discretion permits it `to nip any potential conflict of interest in the bud.'" Id., at 266.

After reviewing the record in this case, we find that the trial judge acted within the bounds of his discretion in disqualifying the appellants' attorney.

Accordingly, we affirm the order of the trial judge.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

United States v. Salinas

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Jul 8, 1980
618 F.2d 1092 (5th Cir. 1980)
Case details for

United States v. Salinas

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. JUAN RODRIGUEZ SALINAS…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Jul 8, 1980

Citations

618 F.2d 1092 (5th Cir. 1980)

Citing Cases

United States v. Snyder

We see no reason for requiring Snyder to do any more following the order disqualifying his counsel in order…

United States v. White

Though there exists no single definition of an "actual conflict," the circumstances of this case present a…