Opinion ID: 200778
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The district court made an adequate inquiry

Text: 13 When a defendant seeks the replacement of appointed counsel, we expect the trial court to conduct an appropriate inquiry into the source of the defendant's dissatisfaction. Myers, 294 F.3d at 207 (internal citation omitted). The extent and nature of the inquiry may vary in each case; it need not amount to a full formal hearing. Woodard, 291 F.3d at 108. 14 The district court made an adequate inquiry into the reasons Reyes sought new counsel. The district court scheduled a hearing the day after it received the motion. At the hearing, the district judge asked Smith if he was correct in concluding that the reason Reyes wanted new counsel was to get a more experienced lawyer. Smith informed the court that its conclusion was correct. 15 The district judge then asked Reyes why he wanted new counsel. Reyes responded that he wanted new counsel because he had recently learned he could be deemed a career criminal and wanted the best possible counsel available. Specifically, he wanted a lawyer with more trial experience than Smith. 16 Before making a final decision on the motion, the district judge asked Reyes a second time if there were any other reasons he needed a new lawyer. Reyes replied in the negative. The district judge indicated that he was very familiar with Reyes's case and that he thought Smith was a good attorney. 17 The district judge's inquiry was adequate. See, e.g., Myers, 294 F.3d at 205-07 (holding there was a sufficient inquiry when the judge engaged in a conversation with the defendant and with defendant's counsel regarding the reason for the motion to withdraw); Woodard, 291 F.3d at 108 (holding that there was an adequate inquiry when the judge inquired of the defendant why there was a dispute with counsel); Richardson, 894 F.2d at 497 (holding there was an adequate inquiry when the judge questioned lawyers regarding nature of dispute); Allen, 789 F.2d at 93 (holding there was an adequate inquiry when the court invited appellant to make a statement, listened to his reasons for being dissatisfied with his counsel, and found them to be without merit).