CAN ONE CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY REPRESENT TWO PEOPLE CHARGED WITH THE SAME CRIMES?

If you have found our website, you are likely searching for an answer on whether or not a criminal defense attorney can represent two co-defendants in a criminal case. Or in other words, can two individuals who are accused of committing the same crimes or are involved in the same incident be represented by one lawyer? The Zuckerman Law Firm LLC has represented individuals charged in connection with the same incident in Western Pennsylvania, and this decision has been made with careful consideration of the facts and issues.

Is there a conflict of interest associated with joint representation? Can this conflict of interest be waived?

The simple answer is that in most cases, a conflict of interest will exist. A conflict of interest may arise when an attorney represents two parties who are charged as co-defendants (both accused of committing the same crime) or cross-complainants (two individuals accusing one another of crimes, typically in domestic assault cases).

The Rules of Professional Conduct state generally that an attorney should not represent a client if by representing one client, the other client would be negatively impacted. A clearcut example is a scenario where Client A and Client B are in a vehicle where drugs are found, where Client A blames Client B for the drugs, and Client B blames Client A for the drugs. In this scenario, it is impossible to represent one client without harming the other client’s interests.

However, some conflicts of interests can be waived under the Rules of Professional Conduct if the lawyer believes he can provide competent and diligent representation to each client, representation is legal, representation doesn’t involve asserting a claim by one client against another client, and each client gives informed consent.

Examples where joint representation was provided by the Zuckerman Law Firm

Our firm has jointly represented clients charged in connection with the same incident. Generally speaking, our firm has done so for preliminary hearings and traffic cases when clients are not accusing one another of wrongdoing, the clients have similar defenses or arguments to be presented in court, or other circumstances make it likely that the case will not proceed to a full hearing or trial in the future. Here are some real-life case examples where our firm accepted joint representation:

Case 1: Husband and wife charged with Simple Assault on one another, where both parties are refusing to testify under the 5th Amendment, and there is no independent evidence to prove the charges against one another without their testimony. Charges were dismissed for insufficient evidence against both parties.
Case 2: Boyfriend and girlfriend were accused of assaulting a third party. Both parties asserted that Client 1 had no role in the altercation, and Client 2 acted solely in self-defense. The firm represented both parties at a preliminary hearing, and the parties obtained separate legal counsel for trial. Both parties were found not guilty at trial.
Case 3: Boyfriend was charged with a DUI and girlfriend was charged with marijuana possession. Girlfriend told police the marijuana was hers, and the boyfriend was not charged with it. As a result, the clients were not blaming one another for the narcotics, so joint representation was appropriate. Girlfriend’s charges were withdrawn by agreement, and boyfriend entered ARD on DUI charges.
Case 4: Boyfriend and girlfriend charged with possession of drugs and paraphernalia found within the home. Both parties made admissions that the items found therein belonged to the both of them. As a result, the parties were not blaming one another. One case pending, other case resolved with plea to summary disorderly conduct.
Case 5: Father and son accused of stealing equipment they believed was abandoned. Both parties acknowledged taking the items, unaware that they belonged to someone else. As a result, both parties had consistent defenses, making joint representation possible. Both parties received ARD for the case.
Case 5: Husband and wife were accused of a Racing on Highways traffic offense. Both parties had discussed the matter fully before contacting the firm, denied having been involved in a racing incident, and were asserting the same defenses. The firm jointly represented the couple, obtaining not guilty verdicts for the racing offenses.

Here are some real-life examples where our firm rejected joint representation:

Case 1: Person A was accused of attempting to activate stolen cell phones at a retail location, and Person B was waiting behind in a vehicle. Given the likelihood that Person B would blame everything on Person A, joint representation was rejected.
Case 2: Boyfriend and girlfriend were charged with assaulting one another. A third-party witnessed the acts committed by each individual. Cross examination of this third-party witness could have benefitted one client and hurt the other. As a result, joint representation was rejected.

The decision on whether or not to accept joint representation is made after a careful consideration of the facts, defenses and related issues.

What are the benefits and downsides to joint representation?

Typically, a reduction in cost is the biggest benefit, as co-defendants may typically pay less to have one lawyer attend a hearing rather than hiring separate lawyers. Furthermore, in cases where co-defendants are not blaming one another and are seeking similar outcomes, joint representation may be appropriate.

However, there are significant downsides to joint representation. With standard representation, information provided by one client to an attorney is kept confidential. With joint representation, information provided by one client may be shared with the other client, and vice versa, which may be detrimental. Furthermore, with cases that proceed past the preliminary hearing phase of prosecution, attorneys will typically not represent two parties at trial, leading one party to have to change lawyers midway through the case.

I’d like to seek a consultation for joint representation. What should I do?

First, our office recommends that only one individual contact the Zuckerman Law Firm LLC at 412-447-5580 for a free consultation. This individual should be sure to contact the firm in a private setting where nobody can overhear the conversation, including the other party involved.

There is a reason we do not recommend a joint consultation amongst co-defendants. First, the attorney-client privilege protects communications made between an individual and his attorney only. If another party is privy to the conversation, the statements made during the consultation may not be privileged, and may be used against you in court.

Second, the attorney needs to properly determine whether there is a conflict of interest, and whether or not it can be waived. If the attorney determines that the conflict cannot be waived, it is important that they have only heard one party’s version of events. If the attorney cannot waive the conflict, and has heard both parties speak on the matter, it might prohibit the attorney from representing anyone on the case. As a result, it’s recommended that the lawyer speak with one party first and then make a decision on whether or not to proceed with individual or joint representation.

If you and a friend or loved one are seeking joint criminal defense representation, please contact the Zuckerman Law Firm at 412-447-5580. If joint representation makes sense, we can have the parties sign paperwork to proceed forward. In cases where joint representation would be unethical, our firm can refer one party to another qualified criminal defense attorney to ensure that everyone involved receives the proper representation they deserve. Our firm strives to make the right ethical decision in each scenario.