Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Source documents Order: Substitution of Counsel, Telephonic Conference Request Denied — United States v. Maxwell (Dkt. 207)

Order: Substitution of Counsel, Telephonic Conference Request Denied — United States v. Maxwell (Dkt. 207)

Summary

Order, Document 207, filed 12/01/22, in 21-CR-247-04 (PAE), United States of America v. Alvin Maxwell, by District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer. It states that sentencing is scheduled for Monday, December 5, 2022, and that the Court received an attached letter from Peter Brill, Esq., stating that a conflict has arisen between Mr. Maxwell and Mr. Brill that in Mr. Brill's view requires a substitution of counsel. The order denies the request for a telephonic conference and says the issue will be taken up at the start of the in-person sentencing hearing. The attached letter, dated November 30, 2022, states that Mr. Maxwell's letter of November 22, 2022 says he intends to sue counsel in New York State Supreme Court for "attorney malpractice."

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Cite this document

“Order: Substitution of Counsel, Telephonic Conference Request Denied — United States v. Maxwell (Dkt. 207).” Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/court-filing-s-d-n-y-no-1-21-cr-00247-dkt-207-s-d-n-y-7f436d177b/, SHA-256 85ff300398bb0a87c74ee44faeee2779426eeebee3e4a10f7cb638d77f2495c9.

Full text

          Case 1:21-cr-00247-PAE Document 207 Filed 12/01/22 Page 1 of 4




UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK


 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                                       21-CR-247-04 (PAE)
                         -v-
                                                                              ORDER
 ALVIN MAXWELL,

                                        Defendant.


PAUL A. ENGELMAYER, District Judge:

        Sentencing of defendant Alvin Maxwell is scheduled for Monday, December 5, 2022, at

2:15 p.m. The Court yesterday received the attached letter from Peter Brill, Esq., stating that,

based on a letter Mr. Brill has received, a conflict has arisen between Mr. Maxwell and Mr. Brill

that in Mr. Brill’s view requires a substitution of counsel. Mr. Brill proposes that a telephonic

conference be held to take up this issue. That request is DENIED. The Court will take up this

issue at the start of the sentencing hearing on Monday, December 5, 2022, which will be held in

person and for which the presence in person of both Mr. Brill and Mr. Maxwell is required. In

the event that the Court determines that a substitution of counsel is in order, the Court will

arrange for a such substitution. In the event the Court determines that a substitution of counsel is

not required, all parties should be prepared to proceed, as scheduled, to sentencing.

        The Court directs Mr. Brill urgently to contact Mr. Maxwell to discuss the issue(s) raised

in Mr. Brill’s letter.
Case 1:21-cr-00247-PAE Document 207 Filed 12/01/22 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:21-cr-00247-PAE Document 207 Filed 12/01/22 Page 3 of 4




                      EXHIBIT A
                 Case 1:21-cr-00247-PAE Document 207 Filed 12/01/22 Page 4 of 4




                                                      November 30, 2022



Via ECF
Hon. Paul A. Engelmayer
United States District Judge
Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse
40 Foley Square
New York, New York 10007

               Re:     USA v. Bella (Alvin Maxwell)
                       21 Cr. 247


Dear Judge Engelmayer:

        I have just received a letter from Mr. Maxwell dated November 22, 2022 that was
delivered to my Manhattan office in the last two days. In that letter, Mr. Maxwell expresses
his belief that I have refused to use exculpatory evidence in his defense and says that he
intends to sue me in New York State Supreme Court for “attorney malpractice” while
offering to “settle out of court.”

      Oddly, Mr. Maxwell never mentioned this letter when I sent him my sentencing
memo for review or when I spoke to him on the phone this week.

        I think that there can be no doubt that Mr. Maxwell has now created an unequivocal
conflict between us. As such, I do not believe I should remain as his counsel. I am therefore
respectfully asking the Court to schedule an immediate hearing, possibly by telephone as
Mr. Maxwell lives in Texas, to address Mr. Maxwell’s ongoing representation.

       Thank you for your consideration.


                                                      Respectfully submitted,



                                                      Peter E. Brill

File and source

File
207.pdf
Size
798,702 bytes
SHA-256
85ff300398bb0a87c74ee44faeee2779426eeebee3e4a10f7cb638d77f2495c9
Our copy
207.pdf
Original
No public link identified.
Back to top