United States v. Jones, No. 10-2769 (8th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute heroin and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking offense. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding that there was adequate time for defense counsel to prepare and the court could not find any abuse of discretion in denying defendant's motion to continue in order to substitute counsel. The district court satisfied its duty to inquire into defendant's claims regarding the breakdown of the attorney-client relationship and did not abuse its discretion in determining that the relationship between defendant and his defense counsel did not rise to the level of conflict necessitating a continuance and a new attorney. Defendant waived his right to object to the playback of wiretap tapes outside of his presence and the court rejected defendant's contention that the playback of the tapes for the injury amounted to structural error. Accordingly, defendant's conviction was affirmed.
Court Description: Criminal case - Criminal law. District court did not abuse its discretion by denying defendant's motion to continue trial in order to substitute counsel as his retained attorney was prepared and ready for trial; the court made an adequate inquiry into the nature of defendant's complaints and did not abuse its discretion by finding his dissatisfaction with counsel did not rise to the level of a conflict which would require a continuance and substitution of counsel; defendant waived any objection he might have had to the court's action in playing tapes for the jury outside of his presence as his attorney did not object to the action and helped devise the process used for listening to the tapes; playback of the tapes for the jury's deliberations did not constitute a structural error.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.