United States v. George Morando

George Morando appeals his conviction of conspiracy to possess marijuana with intent to distribute ( 21 U.S.C. § 846 ) and possession of marijuana with intent to distribute ( 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1)).

On the day before trial, Bertram Polis, Morando’s attorney, was informed by the government that one Mary Navarro would testify under a grant of immunity. The following morning, Polis requested leave to withdraw as counsel for Morando because he had previously represented witness Navarro in a criminal matter. Polis told the court that he would have a potential conflict of loyalties in that his cross-examination of Navarro would be impeded by her attorney-client privilege. The district judge denied Polis’ request, stating: “Well anything you learned is in confidence and you couldn’t utilize, but any other counsel that represented her probably wouldn’t know about these things anyway.”

Neither Navarro nor Morando were present during the brief hearing and there is no evidence of waiver of the attorney-client privilege by either party.

The testimony of Navarro on behalf of the government corroborated the testimony of Escalante, the government’s only other witness who identified Morando…