Leversen v. Superior Court

In Leversen v. Superior Court (1983) 34 Cal.3d 530, the defendant and codefendants were charged in connection with a jewelry store robbery. The codefendant, who claimed to have been forced into committing the crime by the defendant, called a witness who she claimed was the mastermind behind the robbery and had, along with the defendant, forced her participation. Counsel for the defendant realized mid-trial that he already represented this witness in connection with a similar jewelry store robbery. The court observed that there were facially apparent conflicts of interest. (Id. at p. 539.) Counsel may have sought lenience for the defendant in exchange for his testimony against the witness. Alternatively, information obtained by the defense from the witness may have inculpated the defendant to the witness's benefit. (Ibid.) Thus, counsel's assertion regarding the existence of a conflict, supported by evidence already before the court, indicated the defendant's right to conflict free counsel would be violated by continued representation. (Id. at p. 540.)