The legal representation of Chad Daybell, accused of murder in a high-profile case, has been a subject of significant attention. John Prior, Daybell's defense attorney, has been at the center of legal proceedings, particularly concerning a motion to withdraw from the case.
Chad Daybell and his defense attorney John Prior were back in an eastern Idaho courtroom Thursday morning for a motion hearing in front of 7th Judicial District Judge Steven W. Boyce.
The Motion to Withdraw
The Motion to Withdraw which was filed by Prior, was asking the courts to allow Prior to withdraw as Chad Daybell’s attorney, his reason was Daybell’s inability to pay for his legal fees, and the court not appointing another attorney to help Prior. Prior has been Daybell's defense attorney since May 2021 after a grand jury indicted Daybell and his wife, Lori Vallow Daybell, on murder and conspiracy to commit murder charges for the deaths of JJ Vallow and Tylee Ryan - two of Lori Vallow Daybell's kids - and Daybell's first wife, Tammy Daybell.
According to the motion, Daybell is requesting two capitol certified attorneys as required by Idaho law since Daybell is indigent and because he is facing the death penalty on three first-degree murder charges related to the death of his current wife’s two children, J.J. Vallow and Tylee Ryan, and Daybell’s former wife Tammy Daybell. Chad Daybell is also charged with two counts of insurance fraud in relation to Tammy Daybell's life insurance policies.
"Mr. Daybell does not have the ability to pay for counsel's continued services and Mr. Daybell seeks the appointment of two capital qualified attorneys to represent him in this matter," Prior wrote in a motion filed Thursday afternoon. "This motion is made with Mr. Daybell's full consent. Mr. Daybell has requested from me that he be given two capital qualified attorneys for his trial."
Read also: The Life of Chad Everett Harris
Prior noted the complexity of the case would require him to work "around the clock, more than full-time for more than four months without compensation and without the assistance of any other counsel. ... I have made a diligent effort to find a lawyer to assist in this matter for a significant amount of time. The attorney who I located and agreed to try to get qualified has not yet been approved by the Public Defense Commission. The time for him to be of any assistance to me in preparing for this trial is long gone," Prior wrote.
Conflicting Statements in Court
In court when arguing why he filed the motion, Prior gave conflicting information about why he wants off the case. “I want to state to the court I don’t desire to get out of this case, I want to stay on this case and regardless of Mr. Daybell’s financial situation I want to stay on this case,” Prior said. “I could care less about the money. Mr. Daybell wants me to stay on this case.” Boyce responded, “Well, that’s not really what your motion says Mr. Prior.”
Boyce questioned Prior further about what was written in the motion; he also asked if Prior is prepared to go to trial just a few months away. “What I’m trying to determine is do you want to withdraw because you are not being paid enough to continue through trial? Or are you seeking to withdraw because you are simply not going to be prepared and ready for trial?” asked Boyce.
Prosecutors filed their intent to pursue the death penalty in Daybell's case in August 2021. Prior has solely represented his client since being hired over three years ago.
State's Argument Against the Removal
Fremont County Prosecutor Lindsey Blake argued on behalf of the state, who is against the removal of Prior as Daybell’s private legal defense attorney. She spoke about the conflicts between the motion, and what was stated in court by the defense. She mentioned the possibility that this was a way to delay the trial for more time by Prior, and she talked about the impact that another delay would create.
Read also: "Married to Evil": Chad Graves
“The real question for the state is can Mr. Prior be effective at trial? The state doesn’t want to redo a trial. We don’t want to get through trail and then have an appellate issue that requires us to do that again,” Blake said. “While the state is extremely frustrated this is being filed so late and we are frustrated this is being filed so late and we are frustrated for the citizens, we are frustrated for the victims in this case. If this motion is granted the state fully recognizes it is going to cause a pretty significant delay and now the victims’ families have to wait that much longer.”
Prosecutors in the case filed an objection the day before the hearing that stated they believed Prior's motion to withdraw was suspicious, noting that Prior let a full year pass before bringing the issue to the court:
As of a year ago, the Defendant and his Counsel were apparently aware of the Defendant’s limited resources to continue to pay for his Counsel’s services, but the issue is only now (as of January 11, 2024) being brought to the State’s attention, and as far as the State knows, is for the first time being raised as an issue affecting Counsel’s continued representation. Given the Defendant and Counsel being well aware of this issue approximately a year ago, the delayed filing until just over two months before jury selection is set to begin, this appears to be an attempt to delay the proceedings and part of a long-term strategy to delay and obstruct the State’s efforts for justice for Tylee Ryan, J.J. Vallow and Tammy Douglas Daybell.
Judge's Decision and Impact
Judge Boyce also talked about the impact of removing Prior; he said appointing two new qualified capitol defense attorneys could set the case back a year or more, and starting from scratch would be difficult for Daybell. He then read through all the scenarios of possible rulings, but first Boyce read back a quote from John Prior in a hearing nearly a year ago discussing this exact scenario.
“Quote there’s going to be no continuance because I’m asking to get out of this case that will not happen, and the courts relied all along on those representations in getting this case scheduled.” Boyce continued, “So, in balancing all of that out and looking at whether or not good cause has been demonstrated today I do not find that there is good cause for withdrawal of council and so under criminal rule 44.1 upon consideration of that standard the court is going to deny the motion to withdraw,” said Boyce.
Read also: Vallow-Daybell Trial: Key Evidence
Boyce ruled on the request Thursday, telling Prior he would not be allowing him to withdraw as counsel.
With the denial, it means that John Prior must represent Daybell, even though he will not be paid by either Daybell or the State of Idaho.
Chad Daybell sits at the defense table after the jury's verdict in his murder trial was read at the Ada County Courthouse in Boise, Idaho, on Thursday, May 30, 2024. Daybell was convicted of killing his wife and his new girlfriend's two youngest kids in a strange triple murder case that included claims of apocalyptic prophesies, zombie children and illicit affairs. ( AP Photo/Kyle Green, Pool)
Trial and Appeal
The trial is set to take place in Ada County beginning April 1st of this year.
Chad Daybell case timeline
Chad Daybell's attorney, John Prior, has filed an appeal with the Idaho Supreme Court to examine his case, the verdict, and the death penalty sentence. Prior wasted no time submitting an appeal to the Idaho Supreme Court which was filed some time on Monday. The jury found Daybell guilty of first-degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder after an eight-week trial last Thursday. That same jury deliberated and decided on the death penalty sentence by Saturday after hearing victim impact statements for much of the day Friday.
Idaho law gives defendants 42 days to appeal a conviction. The Idaho Supreme Court automatically reviews death penalty cases, though that is a separate process from the appeal. Prior also requested that the State appoint an appellate defense attorney, a specialized attorney who will handle the appeals process for Daybell, a process that could take several years.
KBOI legal expert Ryan Black who has been covering the Daybell trial with us since it began predicted the appeal would be coming from Prior in an interview with him after the sentencing.
East Idaho News is reporting the specifics within Prior's appeal, specifically asking the Idaho Supreme Court to consider decisions made by Judge Boyce throughout the trial.East Idaho News reports that the following items are specific points in the appeal:
- Did Judge Boyce err in not granting Daybell's motion to dismiss the grand jury indictment,
- Did Boyce err in ruling Dr.
Lori Vallow Daybell's Case
Daybell and his current wife, Lori Vallow Daybell, were indicted in 2021 on murder and other charges related to the deaths of Vallow Daybell’s two children, 7-year-old Joshua “JJ” Vallow and 17-year-old Tylee Ryan. They were also charged in the death of Daybell's late wife, Tammy Daybell, in 2019.
Lori Vallow Daybell was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison without parole last summer. She is currently in Arizona on charges of conspiracy to commit murder of Charles Vallow, her fourth husband, and Brandon Boudreaux, her former nephew-in-law. Once court proceedings are done in Arizona, she will return to Idaho to serve her life sentence.
Lori Vallow Daybell was convicted on two counts of conspiracy to commit murder and first-degree murder in October.
Popular articles:
tags: #Chad
