The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Annigoni, 57 F.3d 739 (9th Cir. 1995):
"Substantial latitude" has been prescribed for exercise of discretion by the district court where a new rule requires that court to rule on disqualification of counsel representing two defendants jointly charged. Wheat v. United States 486 U.S. 153, 163, 108 S.Ct. 1692, 1699, 100 L.Ed.2d 140 (1988). The reason for this "substantial latitude" is the danger of the district court being whipsawed--damned if it does and damned if it doesn't. Id. at 161, 108 S.Ct. at 1698. A comparable danger of whipsawing the court exists here. The district judge should have substantial latitude.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.