The superior court abused its discretion in granting the prosecution’s recusal motion because no conflict of interest existed. The prosecution moved to recuse the public defender’s office (PDO) from representing Cain on charges stemming from a 1987 murder of a child, alleging conflict of interest. PDO had previously represented Melton, now deceased, who was tried twice for the same 1987 murder, resulting in two mistrials and the eventual dismissal of the case. Melton’s former public defender is now a retired judge, and his duty of confidentiality survived Melton’s death. There was no conflict of interest where the PDO did not have any physical files from the prior representation of Melton, no attorneys who worked for the PDO when it represented Melton still work for the office, and there was no evidence that Cain’s assigned public defender would pull his punches.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here: https://www4.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/A170052.PDF