Can a lawyer take court-appointed indigent criminal defense in one circuit when a firm member is a part-time solicitor in a different circuit?

Plain-English summary

An attorney was appointed to represent an indigent criminal defendant in one judicial circuit, while a member of the attorney's firm served as a part-time assistant solicitor in another circuit. The committee was asked whether the appointment was proper.

The committee concluded it is not a violation. Citing Opinion 82-26, it noted that a lawyer in the same firm as a part-time solicitor may represent criminal defendants in courts other than the county where the solicitor is employed, and that it had not changed that view other than to recognize that solicitors now have circuit-wide jurisdiction. It also relied on Opinion 91-19, which held that, absent some prohibition of law, there is no per se ethical violation in an assistant solicitor representing criminal defendants in another circuit. Because the appointment here was in a different circuit, the firm attorney would not be defending clients prosecuted by the part-time solicitor.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1994, before the South Carolina Bar's adoption of the 2005 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a firm defend indigent clients in one circuit if a firm member is a solicitor in another?

A: The committee concluded yes; it is not a violation, because the appointed lawyer would not be defending clients prosecuted by the part-time solicitor.

Q: Does it matter that solicitors now have circuit-wide jurisdiction?

A: The committee recognized that change but did not alter its view, since the appointment was in a different circuit from the solicitor's.

Background and rules framework

The opinion addressed imputed disqualification (Rule 1.10) and concurrent conflicts (Rule 1.7) in the part-time-solicitor context, concluding no conflict arises across different circuits, and relied on the committee's earlier Opinions 82-26 and 91-19. The rule numbers correspond to the like-numbered Model Rules.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• South Carolina RPC 1.10 / Model Rule 1.10: imputed disqualification within a firm.
• South Carolina RPC 1.7 / Model Rule 1.7: concurrent conflicts of interest.

Other opinions cited:

• SC Bar Adv. Ops. 82-26, 91-19: part-time solicitors and defense work in other counties or circuits.

See also

• SC Bar Ethics Op. 94-32: Volunteer Prosecutor Defending
• SC Bar Ethics Op. 95-05: Ex-Solicitor Suing the Defendant

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scbar.org/for-lawyers/quicklinks/legal-resources/ethics-advisory-opinions/ethics-advisory-opinion-94-31/

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

UPON THE REQUEST OF A MEMBER OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA BAR, THE ETHICS ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAS RENDERED THIS OPINION ON THE ETHICAL PROPRIETY OF THE INQUIRER’S CONTEMPLATED CONDUCT. THIS COMMITTEE HAS NO DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY. LAWYER DISCIPLINE IS ADMINISTERED SOLELY BY THE SOUTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT THROUGH ITS COMMISSION ON LAWYER CONDUCT.

Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-31

An attorney is appointed to represent an indigent criminal defendant. A member of his/her law firm is a part-time assistant solicitor in another circuit.

Question:
May an attorney be appointed to represent indigent defendants in a one judicial circuit when a member of his/her firm is a part-time solicitor in another circuit?

Summary:
It is not a violation for members of the law firm to be court appointed to represent indigent criminal defendants in a circuit different from the circuit of a part-time solicitor.

Opinion:
In Advisory Opinion 82-26 this committee held that a lawyer in the same law firm as a part-time solicitor could represent criminal defendants in courts other than in the county in which the solicitor is employed. Other than recognizing that solicitors now have circuit wide jurisdiction, this committee has not changed its opinion.

Additionally, we have held that absent some prohibition of law, there is no per se ethical violation against an assistant solicitor representing criminal defendants in another circuit. Advisory Opinion 91-19.

The firm attorney in this case will not be defending clients prosecuted by the part-time solicitor since the appointment is in another judicial circuit.