JUDGE CRITICIZES DRUG CASE DECISION

A Scott County Lawyer Had A Conflict Of Interest And Shouldn't Have
Taken On The Case, He Says.

A federal judge has sharply criticized the Iowa Supreme Court for what
he called an "unreasonable" decision about a man's legal
representation in a drug case.

U.S. District Judge Robert Pratt, in an opinion filed in Des Moines
last week, said the court failed its "duty" to determine if the man's
lawyer had a conflict of interest when the lawyer agreed to work as a
prosecutor in the same county.

Wrote Pratt, "The state courts in this case made absolutely no inquiry
into the conflict-of-interest issues despite the timely complaints of
petitioner Atley, his lawyer and the state prosecutor."

"In so doing," added Pratt, "the Iowa Supreme Court disregarded the
explicit command of the United States Supreme Court."

Lewis Atley was convicted by a Scott County jury June 8, 1995, for
various drug-related crimes. Records show he had three lawyers, the
first two of whom withdrew because of differences with Atley.

Atley's third court-appointed lawyer learned months after his
appointment that he been hired by the Scott County attorney's office.
He replaced another lawyer who handled many drug cases for the county
attorney.

Citing a conflict of interest, Atley asked the court to dismiss the
lawyer, who also asked to withdraw. But, the trial court judge refused.

The judge said he knew of Atley's concerns, but "I don't give that a
huge amount of weight" because Atley, the judge said, had tried to
delay the proceedings.

About Atley's lawyer, the judge said, "He will be expected to provide
Mr. Atley with his usual high quality of representation and be zealous
in his representation."

After reviewing the case, the Iowa Supreme Court upheld the trial
court, saying it was "unlikely that further questioning" would have
changed the outcome.

Pratt disagreed and wrote, "For this court to accept as 'adequate
inquiry' the failure to make any inquiry whatsoever, it would have to
effectively and obviously eviscerate the spirit and letter" of U.S.
Supreme Court rulings.

Pratt continued, "In lieu of probing and specific questions to any
real inquiry, the Iowa Supreme Court chose to accept the untested
general observations of the trial court."

Bob Brammer, spokesman for the Iowa attorney general's office, said it
wasn't immediately known if there would be an appeal.

Pratt's decision required Atley's immediate release. But, Pratt
stayed that order to give the state time to decide if it wants to
recharge him.

Records show, however, that Atley has recently been paroled. The
state might appeal to settle issues raised by Pratt.

Reporter Frank Santiago can be reached at (515) 284-8528 or
santiagof@news.dmreg.com

Checked-by: Patrick Henry