The following excerpt is from USA. v. Trung Tran Nguyen, 262 F.3d 998 (9th Cir. 2000):
Finally, the District Judge commented that any problems with his decision not to grant a continuance for the substitution of counsel could be remedied on appeal by a challenge regarding the effective assistance of counsel. For a judge to maintain that the only solution to an attorney-client conflict is an appeal based on ineffective assistance is destructive of fundamental due process. By incorrectly limiting the defendant's arguments, the suggestion risks undermining the defendant's rights on appeal and on retrial after an appeal. See Taylor v. Reno, 164 F.3d 440, 446 (9th Cir. 1998) (addressing, but rejecting on the facts, the argument that the judge's comments might violate due process by lulling the defendant out of pursuing a particular challenge).
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.