Farnum v. LeGrand

Filing 24

ORDER Denying Respondents' 10 Motion to Disqualify Counsel for Petitioner. From this date forward, the hard copy of any exhibits shall be forwarded for this case to the staff attorneys in Las Vegas. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 5/7/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6
7
8
9

JOHN MICHAEL FARNUM

10

Petitioner,

11

vs.

12

ROBERT LEGRAND, et al.,

13

Case No. 2:13-cv-01304-APG-PAL

Respondents.

ORDER

14
15

Respondents filed a motion to disqualify counsel for petitioner (Dkt. #10), petitioner filed an

16

opposition (Dkt. #12), and respondents replied (Dkt. #13). The court directed respondents to

17

identify claims that they argue are procedurally defaulted, and the court directed petitioner to rebut

18

that argument and to file a waiver of any present or potential conflict of interest. Order (Dkt. #14).

19

Respondents have filed their response to the order (Dkt. #15), and petitioner has filed an opposition

20

(Dkt. #23) with a waiver personally executed by petitioner.

21

Respondents’ response and petitioner’s waiver have ended any concern of a conflict of

22

interest for petitioner’s counsel. Respondents have noted that none of petitioner’s current claims of

23

ineffective assistance of counsel appear to be procedurally defaulted, and thus petitioner’s counsel

24

would not be in the position of arguing his own ineffectiveness as cause to excuse the procedural

25

default. Petitioner has waived any future claim that counsel was ineffective for not raising in his

26

state habeas corpus petition any claims that trial or direct-appeal counsel were ineffective.

27

Petitioner also has stated that he has consulted with an independent attorney on the matter. Under

28

these circumstances, there is no reason to remove petitioner’s current counsel.

1

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that respondents motion to disqualify counsel for

2

petitioner (Dkt. #10) is DENIED. Briefing on the petition shall continue in accordance with the

3

court’s prior orders (Dkt. #s 8 and 14).

4
5
6

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, from this date forward, the hard copy of any exhibits
shall be forwarded—for this case—to the staff attorneys in Las Vegas.
Dated:

May 7, 2014.

7
8

_________________________________
ANDREW P. GORDON
United States District Judge

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-