Opinion ID: 994745
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Adequacy of District Court Inquiry

Text: When either the defendant or his attorney raises a substantial complaint about continuing representation, the district court must make a thorough inquiry into the cause of the difficulties. See Mullen, 32 F.3d at 896. Here, the district court made a satisfactory inquiry into the cause of the lawyer/client conflict. The hearing, discussing the difficulties with the representation, lasted for forty-five minutes. During that time, the district court thoroughly questioned Dukes, Cornely, and the Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) present for the hearing. Dukes revealed that the sole reason for his dissatisfaction with Cornely was the statement made in the Government's response asserting that Cornely was not experienced in federal court. Dukes indicated that he thought fellow lawyers would have insight into his lawyer's reputation. On that basis, he gave credence to the Government's statement regarding his lawyer's inexperience as an accurate reflection of Cornely's reputation among other lawyers, and he believed that Cornely had lied about his experience in federal court. Therefore, Dukes began to distrust Cornely. During the hearing, the AUSA clarified that the Government's statement in its response was limited to the detention hearing context and that the Government thought that Cornely had done a good job representing Dukes in all other respects. The district court further questioned Dukes regarding his satisfaction level with the representation up until the point that the response brief was filed. Dukes indicated that the only reason for his dissatisfaction with Cornely was the distrust he felt in response to the Government's statement. Until he had received the Government's response to his motion, Dukes had had no complaints about Cornely and thought he had been doing a good job on his behalf. In short, the district court took ample time to have a detailed conversation with Dukes and the attorneys regarding the problems with 7 the representation. The district court made an adequate inquiry into the cause of Dukes' dissatisfaction with counsel.