Court hears representation appeal

Attorney looking to stick with two charged in synthetic pot case

Jul. 10, 2013 1:17 AM  
Written by
Lisa Roose-Church
Daily Press & Argus

The question of whether a Madison Heights attorney can represent two Livingston County women on charges they sold synthetic marijuana is now in the hands of the state Court of Appeals.

The court heard arguments Tuesday and there is no timetable for a decision on whether Timothy Corr can represent Melissa Dzierwa and Ronda Roszak, both of whom are charged with one count of possession with intent to distribute a synthetic marijuana product known as Gods of Aroma. The women were selling the product at Smokers Depot on Lawson Drive in Genoa Township.

Livingston County Prosecutor William Vailliencourt said the panel “was very attentive and asked a number of questions.” He declined to speculate on how the prosecution fared.

“We feel confident in our case, but we’ll await the opinion of the court,” he said.

Corr expressed a similar sentiment, saying “both parties argued fairly well.”

“We have to wait for the decision,” he said.

Corr was in the middle of a preliminary exam for Dzierwa and Roszak when the prosecution told the judge that a plea offer was being considered for one of the defendants. Corr said that alleged plea offer had not been made.

Livingston County District Judge L. Suzanne Geddis ruled that Corr representing both women would be a conflict of interest, and she ordered the women to find new attorneys. Livingston County Circuit Judge Michael P. Hatty upheld that ruling, prompting Corr to file an appeal on the basis the women’s Sixth Amendment right to choose their own counsel had been violated.

Corr said the Court of Appeals panel asked whether the prosecution was assuring the court its alleged plea offer for one defendant was not a tactical maneuver to get rid of Corr, and the prosecution assured the court it was not.

The panel also questioned whether Corr could become the defendants’ lawyer “later, if necessary,” he said. He surmised he could, but trial preparation is a large part of his responsibility to his clients leading up to the day of trial.

“One of the things we’re talking about is a constitutional right,” Corr said after the hearing. “It’s a federal right. It’s a concrete concept; there’s no question about it. The prosecutor keeps talking about what-ifs despite the fact the defendants say, ‘I don’t care if you offer me a plea, I’m not taking it. ...’ One thing clear in this case is it’s factually not complex. Factually, these Gods of Aroma were sold in open view ... by Ms. Roszak and Ms. Dzierwa as store managers. They both relied on a lab test that specifically said (an illegal chemical) was not in it. You have to know you’re selling something illegal to be guilty of it.”

Corr said there is “no secret testimony” that one defendant can use against the other. Thus, he argues, there is no conflict of interest for him to represent both women.