United States v. Thomas Comans, Iii

MEMORANDUM

Thomas Comans, III, appeals his jury conviction for soliciting sex with a minor over the internet. He challenges the district court’s denial of two requests for change of counsel, both of which were made within two weeks of a retrial. It is undisputed that either motion, if granted, would have required a continuance. We affirm.

We review the denial of motions to substitute or withdraw counsel for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Carter, 560 F.3d 1107, 1113 (9th Cir.2009) (motion to withdraw); United States v. Torres-Rodriguez, 930 F.2d 1375, 1380 (9th Cir.1991) (motion to substitute), overruled on other grounds by Bailey v. United States, 516 U.S. 137 , 116 S.Ct. 501 , 133 L.Ed.2d 472 (1995). In doing so, we consider three factors: (1) the adequacy of the inquiry into the alleged conflict between the defendant and counsel, (2) whether the conflict resulted in a total lack of communication preventing an adequate defense, and (3) the timeliness of the motion and possible delay. Carter, 560 F.3d at 1113 ; Torres-Rodriguez, 930 F.2d at 1380 & n. 2 (explaining that the three-factor analysis applies to a motion to substitute retained counsel where trial would be…