What the Indiana Supreme Court said about 'extraordinary' Delphi situation in its ruling

INDIANAPOLIS — Delphi murder suspect Richard Allen's request for the Indiana Supreme Court to intervene to reinstate his original public defender rose to an "extraordinary" situation, the state's highest court ruled in its formal opinion published Thursday.

When Special Judge Frances Gull removed Allen's original public defenders — Brad Rozzi and Andrew Baldwin — over Allen's objections, his options to appeal the decision were limited.

Generally, judges' pretrial rulings receive judicial review by filing with the Indiana Appeals Court, and the trial court judge must sign off on such an appeal. But such an appeal was extraordinarily complicated given the removal of his original attorneys, the court stated.

This persuaded the court to take up Allen's request for review of Gull's Oct. 31, 2023, ruling.

"... (T)he bottom line is this: a trial court cannot disqualify court-appointed counsel over the objection of both the defendant and appointed counsel unless (a) disqualification is a last resort; (b) disqualification is necessary to protect the defendant's constitutional rights, to ensure the proceedings are conducted fairly and within our professional ethical standards; and (c) those interest outweigh the prejudice to the defendant," Justice Derek Molter wrote in the opinion.

Justices Loretta Rush, Mark Massa and Christopher Goff agreed with the rulings. Justice Geoffrey Slaughter partially disagreed with the majority.

Allen is charged with two counts of murder, two counts of murder in the commission of a felony and two counts of kidnapping. Prosecutors accuse Allen of abducting Libby German and Abby Williams off of the trail east of Delphi near the Monon High Bridge on Feb. 13, 2017, then killing the girls on the north bank of the Deer Creek.

Removing Rozzi and Baldwin from Allen's case should only be used as a last resort, the court ruled.

"... (T)he record does not reflect that disqualifying counsel was the last resort," the opinion stated.

The reasons listed for Gull's disqualifying Rozzi and Baldwin were based on the judge's concerns about leaked evidence, Baldwin's mistakenly misdirected email with contents about the case, Rozzi and Baldwin's extrajudicial statements while prosecutors' motion for a gag order was pending.

The state and Gull's attorneys failed during the Jan. 18 arguments and in their briefs to show how Allen might have been harmed by his attorneys' statements made in their November 2022 news release or the statements in their motions for modifying his safekeeping order.

More: Delphi murder suspect's defense claims key evidence destroyed, wants charges dropped

"(W)hile (Gull's) conclusion that counsel were constitutionally ineffective was too harsh, she wasn't wrong to be deeply concerned that sensitive case material leaked.

"They do argue the disclosure of case materials undermines Allen's defense, but they don't explain how," the opinion states. "And they don't argue these mistakes reflect that Baldwin and Rozzi are incompetent to handle Allen's defense or explain why disqualification is necessary to protect Allen's right to effective assistance of counsel."

The court cited Baldwin and Rozzi's years of experience to dispel Gull's characterization of the two being incompetent or negligent.

The ruling also noted that statements by Baldwin and Rozzi — allegedly wrong statements — made during a motion to reconsider the safekeeping order does not rise to the level to disqualify public defenders.

The order does state that trial court judges have methods to force compliance with their directives, including fines and imprisonment for violations.

The order denies Allen's request for the court to disqualify Gull as the presiding judge on his case and his request to order a speedy trial.

The speedy trial request was never filed with the court before Rozzi and Baldwin's removal. It may still be filed now that they have been reinstated.

As for removing Gull because she appears biased in her decisions against Allen and by removing Rozzi and Baldwin, the opinion stated, " ... (N)othing in the record suggests the special judge's decision emerged from bias or prejudice against Allen.

"Just the opposite, the special judge explained she disqualified counsel because she was trying to protect Allen's right to the effective assistance of counsel," the opinion stated. "And we don't minimize her concern; she faced a significant dilemma given her conclusion that defense counsel were no longer effective."

Slaughter agreed with the majority's decision not to remove Gull and not to force a speedy trial order onto the court. However, he disagreed that Allen's appeal to reinstate his original public defenders rose to an extraordinary situation that required the Supreme Court's intervention.

On Thursday afternoon, Gull canceled Allen's 9 a.m. Monday hearing. The hearing was rescheduled for March 18. During the hearing, Gull will address Carroll County Prosecutor Nicholas McLeland's motion for the filing of new charges against Allen and McLeland's motion requesting that Rozzi and Baldwin be held in contempt of court.

Reach Ron Wilkins at rwilkins@jconline.com. Follow on Twitter: @RonWilkins2.

This article originally appeared on Lafayette Journal & Courier: Delphi murder case: State high court issues ruling on 'extraordinary' situation