Maricopa County Public Defender’s Office v. Superior Court

Attorneys from the Maricopa County Public Defender’s Office (public defender) (plaintiff) were representing two clients, Clarence Charles Nelson and Frank Rangel, on two unrelated burglary criminal trials. The public defender moved to withdraw from representing Nelson and Rangel due to conflicts of interest arising from previously representing individuals involved in the two burglaries who were now testifying against Nelson and Rangel. The public defender argued that the previous clients’ files contained confidential information that the public defender would have to use to impeach the previous clients’ testimony against Nelson and Rangel. In both cases, the Superior Court of the State of Arizona in and for the County of Maricopa (superior court) (defendant) demanded that the public defender reveal the confidential facts necessitating withdrawal in order for the court to consider the motions. In the Nelson matter, the public defender refused to disclose the confidential information, and the superior court denied the motion. In the Rangel matter, although the public defender disclosed the information in a confidential memorandum, the superior court denied the motion, stating that the public defender had not shown that it possessed attorney-client communications it could use to impeach the prior client. The public defender appealed both denials to the Arizona Court of Appeals.