A family member was convicted in a federal case for conspiracy with intent to deliver a controlled substance. The attorney that we retained previously represented the confidential informant in this case and the co-defendant as well. Because of our lack of knowledge about the judicial process, he(the family member) was persuaded (by his attorney) to plead guilty. He did so under the threat of his wife being indicted for money laundering.(with no grounds, evidence, etc.). In the District Court, the Assistant United States Attorney on the record, recognized the possible conflict and brought this issue to the court''s attention. In response, the defense attorney stated, "This would only become an issue if this case goes to trial. I doubt that will happen." From that point on, he relentlessly did everything within his power to get a guilty plea. We had no idea that this attorney could not continue in this matter if it went to trial. After seeking alternate legal advice, we released the initial lawyer and r

You could ask the 7th Circuit for a rehearing en banc, which if granted means that all of the judges on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals will review your case and either agree or disagree with the panel of three judges that affirmed the decision. Another option is to appeal the 7th Circuit decision to the U.S. Supreme Court by seeking a Petition for Writ of Certiorari. These are not often granted. Your third option, and the one with the greater chance of success, is to seek post-conviction relief in the trial court by filing a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2255, to vacate the conviction on the grounds that it was obtained in violation of the defendant''s constitutional rights, specifically, the right to effective assistance of counsel as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment. The right to effective assistance of counsel can include the right to conflict-free representation. You have one year from the time the conviction is final (the date your last appeal is decided) to bring this motion. In order to prevail on your motion, you will have to establish that your counsel''s representation was so deficient that it "fell below an objective standard of reasonableness" and was prejudicial. This is not an easy standard. To show that your first counsel did not render effective assistance due to his previous representation of the informant, you will have to establish first that there was a plausible alternative defense strategy or tactic might have been pursued. You need not show that the defense would necessarily have been successful if it had been used, but that it possessed sufficient substance to be a viable alternative. Second, you must establish that the alternative defense was inherently in conflict with or not undertaken due to the attorney''s other loyalties or interests. You should discuss your options first with the lawyer that handled your appeal. If you decide to seek a second opinion, try to find an attorney who specializes in post-conviction matters in federal court. Good luck!