Opinion ID: 2790618
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Alleged Failure to Appoint a New Attorney

Text: In addition, Mr. Matthews contends that the trial court should have appointed new counsel when the attorney-client relationship broke down. This contention is not reasonably debatable. At the preliminary hearing, Mr. Matthews asked for a new attorney, then said he would try to find an attorney. 2 Roughly four 2 The transcript of the preliminary hearing is not in our record on appeal. But, we take judicial notice of the transcript. See note 1, above. The transcript shows the following discussion between Mr. Matthews and the court: The Court: . . . And then you’re gonna hire your own attorney, Mr. Matthews? Mr. Matthews: Ah, I would like to at least try to get another state-appointed one toward me. The Court: Well, you . . . 4 weeks later, Mr. Matthews attended court with the same attorney, and no one said anything about the need to appoint a new attorney. See Tr., passim, Colo. v. Matthews, No. 07-CR-1097 (Adams Cnty., Colo. Cnty. Ct. June 6, 2007); see also note 1, above (discussing judicial notice). The trial court assumed that Mr. Matthews no longer wanted appointment of a new attorney, and the Colorado Court of Appeals Mr. Matthews: . . . until I can, until then, Sir. The Court: Well, no, I mean, you’ve got one appointed right now. Mr. Matthews: Yeah, I know that but evidently she doesn’t want to work with me, so. The Court: Well, that’s neither here nor there, so you hire your own or you’re . . . she’s on board . . . doesn’t matter to me. Do you want to try and hire your own? Mr. Matthews: I guess so. The Court: Okay. That’s fine. Let me re-set this and give you some time.