Skip Navigation

 
The Florida Bar
www.floridabar.org
OPINION 76-3
February 1, 1977
A law firm that represents the local sheriff either individually or in connection with official duties may not engage in criminal defense work in that same jurisdiction unless the representation of the sheriff is so casual or sporadic so as not to create the appearance of impropriety.

Opinion: 74-37

Vice Chairman Lehan stated the opinion of the committee:

A lawyer inquires as to the scope of this Committee's Opinion 74-37 saying that members of a law firm which represents the local sheriff in civil matters may not engage in criminal defense work in that same jurisdiction because of possible conflict of interest and appearance of impropriety.

This inquiry involves whether a firm which represents the local sheriff in criminal matters from time to time, e.g., alleged police brutality cases, and is not on a retainer is within the scope of Opinion 74-37.

The Committee believes that Opinion 74-37 applies whether the firm represents the sheriff in either civil or criminal matters, or both, and applies whether the firm represents the sheriff on a retainer basis or on some other fairly regular basis (and not a totally irregular, sporadic, or isolated basis) which would, or might, establish the firm in the public's mind as having access to information useful in criminal defense matters which would not otherwise be available to it.

The lawyer further asks whether Opinion 74-37 would preclude criminal defense work in that jurisdiction if the firm does not represent the sheriff's office in connection with official duties, either civilly or criminally, but represents the sheriff individually or represents individual deputies in personal matters. The Committee feels that Opinion 74-37 is applicable to these circumstances also unless the representation is so casual or sporadic or unrelated in time to the firm's criminal defense work as to not create the appearance, however erroneous, that it has access to information in the sheriff's office it could use in criminal defense matters and which would not otherwise be available to it.




[Revised: 08-24-2011]