Proceedings halted on 2003 Las Vegas homicide case
Court proceedings in the case of a man accused in a 2003 killing have been put on pause after a judge agreed with the state of Nevada’s argument that his legal counsel, the Clark County Public Defender’s Office, has a conflict of interest in the case.
The public defender’s office maintained that no conflict of interest exists and requested to stay proceedings in order to seek a decision from a higher court.
The judge granted this request, putting the case on hold. An emergency petition regarding the issue filed by the defense is scheduled to be heard Wednesday morning in District Court.
Defendant Ricky Lee Trader, 47, is accused of killing 28-year-old Theresa Romano, whose body was discovered in 2003 at a Henderson residence on the 200 block of Gold Street. He is now facing a charge of open murder after new DNA testing linked Trader to the crime scene, police said.
Just days after Romano’s body was discovered on Sept. 3, 2003, a woman named Sherry Wright told detectives that Trader had shown up on her porch saying concerning things, such as that “there was blood all over the place, and she wouldn’t shut up,” referencing an unidentified woman.
Wright is a key witness in the state’s case against Trader, court records show. But the Clark County Public Defender’s Office has previously represented her on two occasions, once in 2011 and once in 2019.
While the public defender’s office maintains that these cases were unrelated to Trader’s and that no conflict of interest exists, on Aug. 5, the prosecution filed a motion to address the potential conflict.
In court the next day, Deputy District Attorney Elizabeth Mercer raised that matter before Judge David Gibson. “Your honor, it has been my experience over the last approximately 15 years that the public defender’s office usually conflicts off when they represent an essential witness in the case,” Mercer said, court transcripts show.
Anna Clark, a public defender, told the court, “We don’t feel we have a conflict.” She added that the office sought the opinion of the state bar, which she said agreed.
Despite this, Gibson said that he did feel there was a conflict. “I’m surprised actually that the public defender’s office would want to stay on the case based on everything I see every day in here with the public defender. With the slightest little thing, they are withdrawing,” he said, transcripts show.
“This is a serious case. We don’t want anything screwing it up so that we don’t get it right,” Gibson said.
In Justice Court Tuesday morning, Clark expressed that the public defender’s office will be taking the matter to the Nevada Supreme Court if the District Court finds that a conflict of interest exists in Wednesday’s hearing.
Contact Estelle Atkinson at eatkinson@reviewjournal.com.