Friday, January 08, 2010
Government: No actual conflict with Mark Nurik
Here's the government's response to Judge Cohn's inquiry regarding whether Marc Nurik is under investigation: he's not. The government explains that he isn't a target or subject in the investigation. But it says:
The government perceives two areas in which Mr. Nurik’s representation of the defendant presents a potential conflict of interest which must be addressed. In examining potential conflicts of interest, the Court’s “goal is to discover whether the defense lawyer has divided loyalties that prevent him from effectively representing the defendant.” United States v. Ross, 33 F.3d 1507, 1523 (11th Cir. 1994). As a former employee of RRA, which has been designated as the Enterprise through which criminal conduct was conducted herein, Mr. Nurik has, at a minimum, professional relationships with other employees of RRA who do have apparent criminal culpability in the case, which could conceivably interfere with the undivided loyalty that Mr. Nurik owes to the defendant.
Secondly,* because Mr. Nurik was an employee at RRA, he may personally be in the position to provide exculpatory evidence on the defendant’s behalf, which would be prohibited if Mr. Nurik persisted in his representation of the defendant.
It is the government’s position that, in the instant case, because the aforesaid constitute potential, rather than actual, conflicts of interest, the defendant may waive those conflicts at a properly-conducted Garcia hearing.
*My question -- is "secondly" a word? Or is it just, "second"?