BREAKING: Fumo Lawyers To Quit While Vince Et. Al Do Crazy Pee Pee Dance
Sprague & Sprague Asks to Quit Fumo Case
By Shannon P. Duffy
September 17, 2007
In a shocking move that could delay the corruption trial of state Sen. Vincent Fumo by several months, lawyers at Sprague & Sprague today sought permission to withdraw from the case.
The move comes less than three weeks after the firm successfully defended its right to remain on the case in a protracted legal battle sparked by a motion from prosecutors demanding that Sprague & Sprague be disqualified.
In a four-page motion filed today, attorneys Richard A. Sprague, Geoffrey R. Johnson and Mark B. Sheppard offered no details for why they are seeking to quit the case.
Holy hell, WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN??? Rest of the Intelligencer story after the jump.
The motion says only that “there exists good cause for seeking to withdraw,” and that “withdrawal at this time will not have any materially adverse effect on the interests of the client.”
On Aug. 29, Senior U.S. District Judge William H. Yohn Jr. had rejected the government’s motion to disqualify Sprague & Sprague, saying that although the firm suffered fro m numerous conflicts, all of those conflicts were “waivable” and that the defense lawyers should therefore be allowed to stay on the case if Fumo chooses to keep them.
“The circumstances presented by this case simply do not rise to the level of egregiousness of those cases in which disqualification was compelled or approved,” Yohn wrote in his 54-page opinion in United States v. Fumo.
“I believe that these conflicts can be cured by a waiver and do not overcome the constitutionally mandated presumption that a defendant is entitled to counsel of choice,” Yohn wrote.
But Yohn also said the issue was not yet fully decided because Fumo must formally waive the conflicts after a colloquy with the judge.
“Although I have concluded that Fumo may waive the conflicts of interests faced by his attorneys, I must satisfy myself that Fumo understands the intricacies and gravity of the conflicts, and will knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waive those c onflicts in order to continue to be represented by the Sprague firm,” Yohn wrote.
A hearing on the waiver issue was scheduled for next week, but Yohn has now decided to hold a hearing this week to consider Sprague & Sprague’s newly filed motion to withdraw.
In an indictment handed up last year, Fumo was accused of perpetrating several wide-ranging fraud schemes to fund a lavish lifestyle at the expense of taxpayers and a charity he helped to form. He is also accused of obstructing justice by instructing his staff to erase thousands of emails soon after he learned of the grand jury probe.
Prosecutors had argued that Sprague & Sprague’s conflicts stemmed from its representation of each of Fumo’s alleged victims — the Citizens Alliance for Better Neighborhoods; the Independence Seaport Museum; and two state Senate entities.
The indictment charges that Fumo concocted schemes to defraud the Senate by using its funds and resources for his personal and political benefit; that he also used Citizens Alliance’s funds to pay for his own lavish lifestyle; and that he stole from the museum by taking cruises on its historic yachts.
In their motion, prosecutors argued that because Sprague & Sprague represented the three victims, the firm’s lawyers would be placed in the position of cross-examining former clients after presumably having learned confidential information.
The defense lawyers would also encounter divided loyalties, the prosecutors argued, because they owe a duty to their former clients as well as to their current client, Fumo.
