Opinion ID: 1922235
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Respondent's Representation of Edward Erler, Jr.

Text: In 1996, the Respondent was employed at the Law Offices of William H. Murphy, Jr. & Associates, P.A. While employed at that law firm, the Respondent was assigned to represent Edward P. Erler, Jr., who was charged with criminal assault and handgun violations in Baltimore County. Trial in the criminal case of State of Maryland v. Edward Erler, Jr., Case No. 96 CR 0161 in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County, was scheduled for and did commence on July 31, 1996. The Respondent was unprepared for that trial and failed to provide competent representation in defending Mr. Erler. Among other things, the Respondent failed to: a. Meet with and go over possible defense strategies with his client; b. Pursue a motion to suppress evidence that may have been illegally obtained; c. Present evidence in support of an intoxication defense that may have been available to his client; d. Prepare adequately to cross-examine the State's witnesses; e. Prepare and submit voir dire; f. Prepare and request specific jury instructions applicable to the charges in the case; and g. Object to possibly improper jury instructions prejudicial to his client. At the conclusion of trial on August 2, 1996, a jury found Mr. Erler guilty of attempted voluntary manslaughter and use of a handgun in a crime of violence. On November 7, 1996, Mr. Erler was sentenced to incarceration for five years. Following an unsuccessful appeal, in which Mr. Erler was represented by the Public Defender's Office, Mr. Erler, now represented by new private counsel, filed a Petition for Post-Conviction Relief in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County. After evidence was presented at a hearing on May 19, 1998, the State conceded that the Respondent had provided ineffective assistance of counsel in defending Mr. Erler at his 1996 trial. The court then granted post-conviction relief. The Court concludes that the Respondent, by his acts and omissions while representing Edward P. Erler, Jr., engaged in misconduct as defined in Maryland Rule BV1k (so numbered at the time of Respondent's representation) and that he violated Rules 1.1 [1] and 8.4(d) [2] of the Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct.