Opinion ID: 2570573
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Withdrawal of county public defender

Text: Leonard's original counsel, the Clark County Public Defender's Office, withdrew on the basis of a conflict of interest after discovering information about a possible alternative suspect, who was also a client of the office. Leonard makes various claims pertaining to the withdrawal and the failure of the public defender to disclose to Leonard the information that it discovered. Leonard has not demonstrated error. The purported conflict of interest provided a facially legitimate reason for the public defender to withdraw. See SCR 157; SCR 166; see also Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 692, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984) (stating that counsel has an obligation to avoid conflicts of interest). Leonard has not shown error based on a conflict of interest because he has not shown that counsel `actively represented conflicting interests' and that `an actual conflict of interest adversely affected his lawyer's performance.' Strickland, 466 U.S. at 692, 104 S.Ct. 2052 (quoting Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335, 350, 348, 100 S.Ct. 1708, 64 L.Ed.2d 333 (1980)). Further, Leonard waived any claim associated with the public defender's failure to disclose the information it discovered when he indicated that he had obtained all relevant information from other sources. [5]