USA v. TAPIA et al

DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
RAYMOND BROWN,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
) 	Criminal No. 2013-22
)
)
)
)
)
ATTORNEYS:
Ronald Sharpe, United States Attorney
Kelly B. Lake, AUSA
St. Thomas, U.S.V.I.
Kim Lindquist, AUSA
St. Thomas, U.S.V.I.
For the plaintiff,
Arturo R. Watlington, Jr.
Law Offices of Arturo Watlington
St. Thomas, U.S.V.I.
For the defendant Raymond Brown,
ORDER
Before the Court is Attorney Arturo Watlington’s motion to
withdraw as counsel for defendant Raymond Brown.
This order is written primarily for the parties, and thus
assumes familiarity with the facts underlying this motion. On
February 10, 2014, the Court held a hearing on the instant
motion. 	At the hearing, the Court inquired as to the bases for
the instant motion. 	Attorney Watlington indicated that he
Case: 3:13-cr-00022-CVG-RM Document #: 574 Filed: 02/12/14 Page 1 of 2

believed there was a conflict which ran afoul of Model Rule of
Professional Conduct 1.7.
Thereafter, the Court referred this motion to Magistrate
Judge Ruth Miller for a Report and Recommendation. 	The
Magistrate Judge found she could not conclude based on the
record that there was a significant risk that the representation
of any of Attorney Watlington’s clients would be materially
limited by his representation of Raymond Brown in this case.
The Magistrate also indicated that she saw nothing to indicate
that there was direct adversity between Raymond Brown and any
other client.
The Court has undertaken a de novo review of the record,
and must agree with the Magistrate Judge’s conclusions.
The premises considered, it is hereby
ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation is ADOPTED; and it is further
ORDERED that the motion to withdraw is DENIED.
S\
CURTIS V. GÓMEZ
District Judge
Case: 3:13-cr-00022-CVG-RM Document #: 574 Filed: 02/12/14 Page 2 of 2