Madrid-Palacios v. United States

How later courts describe this case

• where attorney tenders "facially legitimate explanation for conduct,” factfinder may nevertheless find corrupt motive or intent on basis of contrary circumstantial evidence
• district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion for severance which was accompanied by the affidavit of the movant's counsel, but not by an affida vit of the co-defendant who was expected to testify
• attorney convicted of conspiring to obstruct justice, where the attorney used his position as attorney for a witness before the grand jury to acquire information about, and interfere in, loansharking investigation of another client
• district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion for severance which was accompanied by the affidavit of the movant's counsel, but not by an affidavit of the co-defendant who was expected to testify
• “[T]he acceptance of a retainer by a lawyer in a criminal case cannot become functionally equivalent to the lawyer’s acceptance of a roving commission to flout the criminal law with impunity. A criminal lawyer has no license to act as a lawyer-criminal.”