Defendants often object to assigned attorneys

The man accused of killing him, Marco Antonio Chavez, was arrested within four days.

And yet the case still hasn't gone to trial.

In fact, it could be another 18 months before Chavez stands trial, because two new lawyers are now representing him.

After much discussion, Pima County Superior Court Judge Hector Campoy recently agreed to allow Chavez's original attorneys to withdraw from the case.

Brian Metcalf, Darlene Edminson-O'Brien and Chavez told the judge they had reached an impasse on how to handle the case and could no longer work together in mounting a defense.

The breakdown in communications came within weeks of Chavez's rejection of a deal. Prosecutors had agreed to take the death penalty off the table if Chavez agreed to plead guilty to first-degree murder and serve a no-parole life term.

The Chavez case is an extreme example of what is actually a common occurrence in the criminal justice system, legal pundits agree.

Defendants often ask for new attorneys, attorneys often ask to withdraw from cases and when such motions are granted, delays occur.

There are a number of reasons the relationships between clients and attorneys can break down, defense attorney Dan Cooper said.

Sometimes they just don't "click," sometimes there are trust issues and sometimes the client has a personality disorder or some other mental illness, Cooper said.

The jail is also filled with lots of gossip-mongers who believe court-appointed attorneys are untrained and unskilled, and that there is always a better plea offer coming down the pike.

Every case is different and needs to be judged on its own merits, but defendants often develop unrealistic expectations based on other inmates' cases, Cooper said.

"They'll hear about a manslaughter plea being offered in a murder case, and if you come to them with a worse plea, they'll think it's your fault," Cooper said.

Think of it this way: If someone has enough money to hire an attorney, obviously that person will hire someone he trusts and someone with whom he has developed a rapport.

Indigent defendants aren't so lucky.

Court-appointed attorneys have to extend themselves to earn their clients' trust, Cooper said.

"If an attorney works hard and a client knows it and knows the attorney has their best interest at heart, there's usually not a problem," Cooper said.

Cooper also takes into consideration the client's background.

"You can't treat somebody who has never been arrested before the same way you treat a five-time loser," Cooper said. "Frankly, the goal's the same, though. You want to make sure they trust you."

Cooper has had clients who rejected his advice because they believed they could sway the jury or they thought a miracle would happen.

Criminal defendants sometimes just don't have any insight into how a jury will interpret the facts, Cooper said.

"I had a client years ago who told me, 'Jesus will take care of me,' " Cooper said. "He's still in prison, and that was 20 years ago."

Defense attorney Brick Storts makes a point to visit his clients at the jail at least twice a month. If they are accused of murder, he visits them more often.

"You don't have to go down there and talk about important things; you just want to let them know you're thinking about their case," Storts said.

Pima County Public Defender Robert Hirsh said he believes it's rare for judges to replace his attorneys.

"Our lawyers do their best to connect with their clients, and I think they do a good job," Hirsh said. "Some defendants just aren't satisfied."

Judge Michael Cruikshank, who presides over the criminal bench in Pima County Superior Court, said judges always are cautious when making decisions about representation, but especially in capital murder cases.

"In capital cases, the Supreme Court looks at everything with a microscope," Cruikshank said.

In June 1995, murder suspect Robert Moody forced his public defender to withdraw from the case, and Moody was granted permission to represent himself.

Moody told jurors that aliens had taken over his body and made him kill two women. He was convicted and sentenced to death, but his conviction was overturned when the Arizona Supreme Court ruled he had been denied his right to counsel.

Moody's subsequent conviction was upheld, but he is awaiting resentencing.

When determining whether a lawyer should be released from a case, Cruikshank said he looks at the relative experience of the attorney, the number of times the defendant has asked for a new attorney, and the trial date.

If the victim is elderly or if the lead detective is a National Guard member who is being sent to Iraq, it's less likely the request will be granted, Cruikshank said.

He also looks at whether a new attorney will end up having the same sort of issues with the defendant as the current attorney.

"I always look for a reason as to why it's going to be different the next time around," Cruikshank said. "Sometimes they've just gotten off on the wrong foot, and other times you've got a competent attorney who is giving sound advice, and the defendant just doesn't want to hear it."

Rick Unklesbay, chief trial counsel for the Pima County Attorney's Office, said his office often doesn't take a stance on whether the defendant should get a new attorney. Because of the attorney-client privilege, prosecutors simply don't know what all of the issues might be.

The only exception is when a defendant's motivation is to cause a delay, Unklesbay said.

Judges are generally quick to realize when defendants are just trying to delay their cases, though, Unklesbay said.

As for lawyers, they must avow they are withdrawing for legitimate reasons and not to cause a delay, he added.