Hunter Biden’s criminal defense attorney Chris Clark requested Tuesday to withdraw from representing his client, citing a conflict of continuing to represent the president’s son in a potential trial in which he could be asked to be a witness.
In July, Hunter Biden’s “sweetheart” plea deal fell apart due to legal scrutiny. Prosecutors said they expected the case against Hunter Biden for tax and gun violations to go to trial.
RELATED VIDEO — MSNBC’s Cevallos: Hunter Was Offered “Gift” “as Good as Not Guilty” on Gun Charge for Which There Was Video Proof:
Clark, who was a partner at the same Washington, DC, law firm with Liz Cheney’s husband, filed a motion on Tuesday requesting the judge allow him to remove himself from the case. Clark cited a Delaware rule that prevents lawyers from advocating on behalf of their clients if it is likely a lawyer will be called as a witness.
“Pursuant to Delaware Rule of Professional Conduct 3.7(a), ‘a lawyer shall not act as advocate at a trial in which the lawyer is likely to be a necessary witness unless… disqualification of the lawyer would work substantial hardship on the client,’” Clark wrote in his filing.
Clark’s filing also stated that the prosecution, special counsel David Weiss, will “contest” aspects of the sweetheart plea deal, an agreement in which Clark was a witness.
“Based on recent developments, it appears that the negotiation and drafting of the plea agreement and diversion agreement will be contested, and Mr. Clark is a percipient witness to those issues,” the filing said.
It is unknown who will replace Clark as Hunter Biden’s lead defense attorney against newly appointed Weiss.
U.S. Attorney David C. Weiss. (AP Photo/Ron Soliman, File)
Kash Patel, a former national security prosecutor and federal public defender, told Breitbart News that Clark’s request to remove himself from the trial encompasses all motions preceding trial.
“Any possible conflict of interest that involves counsel becoming a witness is automatic grounds for removal (unless the client waives any conflicts). Whether it’s pre-trial or during trial makes no difference,” he said:Here — it looks as if the Biden team will be challenging the withdrawal of the plea agreement. However, a plea agreement is never final until accepted by the judge. The DOJ can renege at any time — they often do. And with pre-trial diversion agreements, that is in the sole province of the DOJ. It’s a program outside the function of the court. A judge has no role in it.
President Joe Biden boards Marine One with his son Hunter Biden on June 24, 2023. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
On Sunday, Hunter Biden’s lawyers maneuvered to keep the terms of the “diversion agreement” within their failed plea deal intact. The diversion agreement would have given Hunter Biden immunity from future potential charges.
The court filing was in response to Delaware Judge Maryellen Noreika’s request after Weiss asked the judge to dismiss the case.
Hunter Biden was expected to plead guilty last month.
But after the irregular plea deal broke down upon scrutiny from Judge Noreika, the prosecutors said Friday they expected the case to go to trial, indicating they want to try the case elsewhere, outside Delaware and away from the judge.
Follow Wendell Husebø on Twitter @WendellHusebø. He is the author of Politics of Slave Morality.
