People v. Cole
Illinois Supreme Court
104 N.E.3d 325 (2017)
- Written by Jenny Perry, JD
Facts
Salimah Cole (defendant) was charged with a long list of felonies, including first-degree murder, armed robbery, kidnapping, and arson. Cole informed the trial court that she could not afford private counsel, and the court indicated that it would appoint the public defender of Cook County to represent her. Amy Campanelli, the head Cook County public defender, refused the appointment, citing a potential conflict of interest between Cole and multiple codefendants. The public defender moved to withdraw in the codefendants’ cases on the same grounds. Campanelli argued that the public defender’s office should be treated as a law firm, meaning that any conflict on the part of one attorney must be imputed to all the attorneys in the office. Campanelli thus took the position that private counsel must be appointed in any case with multiple defendants because the public defender could not ethically represent more than one. The Cook County public defender’s office employed approximately 518 attorneys. There were multiple divisions with different supervisors, but the supervisors potentially reported to the same deputy director. There was also a multiple-defender division for multiple-offender cases. Campanelli argued that she was in conflict in those cases as well. Campanelli asked the court to hold her in friendly contempt and to impose a nominal sanction to enable her to seek appellate review of the appointment. The court held Campanelli in civil contempt and imposed a fine of $250 per day until she either accepted the appointment as counsel for Cole or was otherwise discharged by due process of law. Campanelli appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Thomas, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.