FILE – Hunter Biden, son of President Joe Biden, walks to a motorcade vehicle after stepping off Air Force One with President Biden, Feb. 4, 2023, at Hancock Field Air National Guard Base in Syracuse, N.Y. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky, File)
A criminal defense lawyer for Hunter Biden who worked on a plea agreement that has since fallen apart in a tax and gun case filed a motion to withdraw Tuesday from representing President Joe Biden’s son.
Attorney Christopher Clark told U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika that Hunter Biden otherwise “has ample counsel” to represent him in the matter. He asserted that his withdrawal from the case “is necessitated by recent developments in the matter.”
“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,”” he wrote. “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.”
More Law&Crime coverage: No deal for now as Hunter Biden’s bumpy ride in court for tax misdemeanors, gun charge goes off rails
Hunter Biden was set to plead guilty to the misdemeanor tax charges and enter a diversion agreement that would have dismissed a charge of felony possession of a firearm by a person addicted to a controlled substance after the completion of probation, but the judge raised questions about the particulars of the deal and ordered up more briefing. Then last Friday, U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland announced that David C. Weiss, the U.S. Attorney already probing Hunter Biden in Delaware, was appointed as a special counsel.
As that announcement was made, there was movement from the government on the Hunter Biden docket.
Read Related Also: ‘I messed up’: Man calls father-in-law after killing wife, three kids, report says
Federal prosecutors filed a motion to vacate the briefing order that the judge had issued. Citing an “impasse,” the government said that it was “no longer the case” that the “parties intend to continue towards a guilty plea in Criminal Action No. 23-mj-00274 and diversion in Criminal Action No. 23-cr-00061.”
“Following additional negotiations after the hearing held on July 26, 2023, the parties are at an impasse and are not in agreement on either a plea agreement or a diversion agreement. Therefore, the Government believes the Court’s briefing order should be vacated,” the filing said. “The United States requested the Defendant’s position on August 9, 2023, and asked for it by August 11, 2023. The Defendant responded and requested an extension of time until August 14, 2023, to provide his position, which the Government declined. As of the time of this filing, the Defendant has not yet provided his position.”
Clark’s motion to withdraw argued that the “‘witness-advocate’ rule” makes it “inadvisable” for him to continue representing Hunter Biden in this case.
“Under the ‘witness-advocate’ rule, it is inadvisable for Mr. Clark to continue as counsel in this case,” Clark’s motion said, attaching a proposed order. “Withdrawal will not cause a substantial hardship to Mr. Biden because counsel from the other firms that have entered an appearance will continue to represent Mr. Biden in this matter.”
As of Tuesday morning, the judge had not yet ruled on the motion.
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
