Williams v. State of Delaware

Attorney Bernard O'Donnell represented two death-penalty clients whose cases raised opposite versions of the same legal issue. In one, where the jury had voted 2-10 against death but the judge imposed it, O'Donnell argued on appeal that the trial court failed to give the jury's vote great weight. In the second, Joseph Williams's (defendant) first-degree murder case, the jury voted 10-2 for death, and Williams could argue that the trial court wrongly gave that recommendation great weight -- the exact opposite position. O'Donnell moved to withdraw and for substitute counsel, warning the conflict could create adverse precedent for one client and undermine his credibility and loyalty; the prosecution agreed he was disqualified.

Whether a positional conflict of interest requiring an attorney to advocate contradictory legal positions for different clients disqualifies him from representing a capital defendant on appeal.