holding, pursuant to court's inherent supervisory power over courts, that "counsel with concurrent prosecutorial obligations may not be appointed to defend indigent persons"
How later courts described this case
- holding, pursuant to court's inherent supervisory power over courts, that "counsel with concurrent prosecutorial obligations may not be appointed to defend indigent persons"
- explaining that a party must make a clear and definite objection at trial to preserve an evidentiary challenge for appeal
- considering the defendant's close proximity to the victim when he threatened the victim with a wrench and the remoteness of the location at which the threat was made as relevant factors in support of the defendant's aggravated assault conviction
- refusing to review issue raised initially in reply brief because appellant "would be rewarded for his omission and given the opportunity to present an unopposed analysis”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
HALL, Chief Justice,
dissenting.
I do not join the court in reversing the conviction on the ground of conflict of interest in the absence of a showing that defendant was in any way prejudiced by reason of his representation by a part-time city attorney. Nothing in the record reveals that defendant was afforded anything less than the undivided loyalty and able assistance of counsel he was entitled to, 1 and it is not for us to speculate otherwise.
In addition, the prosecutorial duties of defense counsel were limited to violation of city ordinances, 2 whereas defendant was tried for a violation of state law. Hence, there was no conflict with defense counsel’s duties as a city attorney.
The distinct differences in the prosecuto-rial responsibilities of county and city attorneys explain the reason the statutory prohibition against county attorneys acting as defense counsel 3 does not include city attorneys.
In any event, in view of the evidence adduced at trial, it is unlikely that a new trial will produce a different result.
. Utah Code Ann. § 77-32-1 (4).
. Utah Code Ann. § 10-3-928 (amended in 1991 to permit prosecution of class A misdemeanors in the name of the State of Utah).
. Utah Code Ann. § 17-18 -l(9)(a) (Supp.1992) (formerly Utah Code Ann. § 17-18-2 (10)(a)).