Opinion 124
Question Presented
Would it be a violation of the Canons of Ethics for a law firm to accept employment in representing a man now in the penitentiary in obtaining a pardon or parole where one member of the firm was the district attorney who prosecuted and convicted the same man, but is now in private practice?
18 Baylor L. Rev. 244 (1966)
ADVERSE INFLUENCES AND CONFLICTING INTERESTS
It is an open question whether a firm may accept employment seeking parole or pardon of one in prison when a member of the firm was the district attorney, before his retirement, who prosecuted and convicted the prospective client.
RETIREMENT FROM JUDICIAL EMPLOYMENT
Where a man in prison seeks to employ a firm to obtain his parole or pardon, the committee is evenly divided on whether such employment should be accepted when a member of the firm is the district attorney who convicted the man, but who is now in private practice.
Canons 6, 33.
Eight replies to this inquiry were received from members of the committee. Four of the members are of the opinion that to accept such employment would violate Canons 6 and 33 of the Canons of Ethics of the State Bar of Texas.
Four members are of the opinion that it would not be a violation since considerations of clemency present an entirely different matter from the conviction of the man for crime. (4-4)
Bluebook Citation
Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 124 (1956)