Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-06149/USCOURTS-ca10-90-06149-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Millard Bowie
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

..... 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

. Pitijb Umted S_f.':!.tc~ tgy 'C uf Ap~ll(~ f ,-Atb r.;--.,:r 

JAN ~ ~ rn@1 

.ROBERT t. HOECKER 

Clerk 

v. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

No. 90-6149 

MILLARD BOWIE, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

(D.C. No. CR 87-146-R) 

(W. D. Okla. ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before HOLLOWAY, Chief Judge, and BARRETT, and TACHA, Circuit 

Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

This appeal is from a district court determination that 

defendant-appellant Millard Bowie was not denied his sixth 

amendment right to effective assistance of counsel in a trial 

where counsel had previously represented some of the witnesses for 

the prosecution. On appeal, Bowie contends the district court 

erred in determining there was no actual conflict of interest that 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 90-6149 Document: 010110083533 Date Filed: 01/29/1991 Page: 1 
-

adversely affected defense counsel's performance. We exercise 

jurisdiction under 28 u.s.c. § 1291 and affirm. 

Defendant Bowie was convicted of conspiracy to possess with 

intent to distribute cocaine and of five counts of using a 

telephone to facilitate the conspiracy. At trial, Bowie was 

represented by Defense Attorney Gigger. The facts relating to the 

original trial are set out in United States~ Bowie, 892 F.2d 

1494 (10th Cir. 1990). On appeal, this court affirmed the 

conviction on all appellate issues except the issue of a possible 

conflict of interest affecting defense counsel's performance. We 

vacated Bowie's conviction and remanded the case to the district 

court for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether an actual 

conflict adversely affected defense counsel's performance and 

whether Bowie had waived the existence of the conflict. On remand 

the district court held an evidentiary hearing and determined that 

neither the witness nor the defendant ever specifically waived any 

conflict of interest. However, the court held Bowie had failed to 

carry his burden of proving that "a specific and seemingly valid 

or genuine alternative strategy or tactic was available to defense 

counsel, but it was inherently in conflict with his duties to 

others or to his own personal interest." Id. 

In reviewing the transcript of the evidentiary hearing and 

the record of the original trial, we cannot say that the district 

court was clearly erroneous in finding defense counsel vigorously 

cross-examined the witness. We also cannot conclude the court was 

clearly erroneous in finding defense counsel had no information or 

strategy available to him as a result of his prior representation 

-2-

Appellate Case: 90-6149 Document: 010110083533 Date Filed: 01/29/1991 Page: 2 
of the witness that he could have used but did use not because of 

any conflict of interest. We conclude Bowie failed to show there 

was any conflict of interest that affected defense counsel's 

representation of him. Therefore, we hold Bowie was not deprived 

of his sixth amendment right to effective assistance of counsel. 

AFFIRMED. 

-3-

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

Deanell Reece Tacha 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 90-6149 Document: 010110083533 Date Filed: 01/29/1991 Page: 3