Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): are free to employ counsel of their own choice and the courts are afforded little leeway in interfering with that choice.” United States v. Cox, 580 F.2d 317, 321 (8th Cir.1978) (citation omitted). However, we have recognized: [t]here are times when an accused’s right to counsel of choice must yield to a greater interest in maintaining high standards of professional responsibility in the courtroom. The trial court may therefore disqualify counsel if necessary to preserve the integrity, fairness, and professionalism of trial court proceedings. Vanover, 559 N.W.2d at 626 (citation omitted) (emphasis added) (affirming the district court’s disqualification of the defendant’s attorney whom the State intended to call as a witness); see also State v. Powell, 684 N.W.2d 235, 242 (Iowa 2004) (<HOLDING>). Indeed, when a defendant’s counsel of choice 
 Holding statements: (A) recognizing the conflict (B) holding that prejudice is only presumed if there is proof of an actual conflict of interest (C) holding that the lower court had inappropriately granted relief based on the existence of a possible conflict and explaining an actual conflict is required (D) recognizing conflict (E) holding the existence of a possible conflict required remand for a determination of whether an actual conflict of interest existed and holding a new trial would be required if an actual conflict existed
Output (English): holding that the lower court had inappropriately granted relief based on the existence of a possible conflict and explaining an actual conflict is required