MILLER v. BLACKETTER
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals today released an opinion in MILLER v. BLACKETTER, No. 06-36090, a habeas corpus appeal. The panel consisted of Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain, Susan P. Graber, and Consuelo M. Callahan, Circuit Judges.
O’SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judge:
We are called upon to decide whether a defendant, whose attorney moved on the morning of trial to withdraw from the case and to postpone proceedings, was denied his right to the counsel of his choice when the trial judge denied the motions. I A Thirty-four-year-old Dustin Vade Miller, unarmed but purporting to be holding a gun, robbed several small retail establishments over a ten-day period in 1998. He was apprehended by police, fought back, and later confessed to the crimes. Miller was charged in Lane County, Oregon, with several counts of robbery, assaulting a public safety officer, and resisting arrest. He pled not guilty to all counts and Janise Augur, of the Lane County Public Defender’s Office, was appointed to represent him. Trial was scheduled, but was continued for thirty days upon Augur’s motion because she had not yet received a tape of Miller’s confession from the State. During this period, Augur and the State attempted to negotiate a plea agreement, but never agreed to the terms. On the evening before trial, Miller left a telephone message on Augur’s home answering machine stating that he was no longer comfortable with her representation and that he wanted a new lawyer. In response, Augur filed motions the next morning to withdraw as Miller’s counsel and to postpone trial. . . .