Member
| The appeal is a separate proceeding. Thus, in my opinion a prior order under either art. 2.07(a) of (b-1) does not continue in effect as to the appeal. While the relationship to the victim might still constitute good cause for your office to be permitted to recuse (again), I would say your handling of the legal issues involved would not likely be influenced by that relationship. There would not appear to be any ethical problem (violation of a DR) involved in your scenario. Your abilities to represent the State should not be adversely limited by who the victim was. If the court were to take the position that the recusal order continues in effect, then I certainly would not think it worthwhile to challenge that decision, but otherwise I think you are free to re-evaluate what role you want to play. |
| |
Member
| When the AG's office is called in to be a DA Pro Tem on a recusal case, we always retain the case through the appellate process. I don't think any of us have ever sat down and given the law a lot of thought, but have always just assumed that whatever conflict made the DA feel he wasn't the appropriate person to prosecute the case, would carry over and have the same effect upon his ability to defend the conviction. Now, sometimes the conflict resolves itself, if, for instance, a new DA is elected in the interim, in that case they can certainly have it back if they want it! |
| |