Cera aw wD LAW OFFICE OF PETER C. PEREZ Suite 802, DNA Building 238 Archbishop Flores Street Hagatfa, Guam 96910 Telephone (671) 475-5055 Facsimile (671) 477-5445 Attorney for Defendant IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF GUAM CRIMINAL CASE NO. 12-00042 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, (U.S. Court of Appeals Case No. 14-10567) Plaintiff, vs. SUBMISSION OF CONSENTS AND WAIVERS KENNETH HUIDONG KANG, Defendant Counsel submits the attached consents and waivers from Kenneth H. Kang and Sun Hee Park, in support of Counsel’s Response to the United States Motion for Rule 44(c) Hearing for Determination of Conflict of Interest. Respectfully dated this 17° day of February, 2015. ———__iss ______ PETER C. PEREZ, ESQ. Counsel for Defendant, Kenneth Hutdong Kang Case 1:12-cr-00042 Document 106 Filed 02/17/15 Page 1 of 1LAW OFFICE OF PETER C. PEREZ February 16, 2015 VIA HAND DELIVERY KENNETH H. KANG RE: USA v. Kenneth H. Kang; District Court of Guam Case No. CR12-00042 Dear Mr. Kang: This writing memorializes that you have been advised of the following: 1. The United States Attomeys’ Office has filed a Motion for Rule 44(c) Hearing asking the court to determine whether or not a conflict of interest exists based upon my prior representation of Ms. Park in her forfeiture proceedings and subsequent representation of Mr. Kang in connection with the appeal of his sentence in District Court of Guam Criminal Case No. 12-00042. A copy of the Motion is attached as Exhibit A. 2. On February 12, 2015, I filed a response to the Motion. A copy of the Response is attached as Exhibit B. 3. Ihave advised the District Court (“court”) that I have been engaged to represent Kenneth H. Kang in the appeal of the sentence imposed against him and judgment issued in District Court of Guam Criminal Case No. 12-00042. 4, The case on appeal is United States Court of Appeals Case No. 14-10567. 5. Pursuant to the scope of representation agreed upon between Counsel and Mr. Kang, Counsel's representation is limited to: (1) filing motions for release pending appeal at the District Court and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals levels; (2) handling client’s appeal of the sentencing imposed on client of six (6) months imprisonment, at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. 6. The following services are specifically excluded from the scope of representation: (1) representation at oral argument on the appeal; (2) appellate services beyond the motions for release pending appeal, the appeal opening brief, and the appeal reply brief; (3) any and all other services at the district court level, including but not limited to resentencing, new trial, cooperation with law enforcement, or any other proceedings. 7. Counsel’s scope of representation will be limited to the record, transcript, and arguments made at the trial court level in CR12-00042. 8. Counsel previously represented Sun Hee Park when Counsel was a partner at Lujan Aguigui & Perez LLP (“LAP”). Counsel has requested copies of the files and Suite 802 * DNA Building 238 Archbishop Flores Street - Hagitiia, Guam 96910 Telephone: (671) 475-5055 « Facsimile: (671) 477-5445 Case 1:12-cr-00042 Document 106-1 Filed 02/17/15 Page 1 of 20Letter dated February 16, 2015 Re: USA v. Kang; CR12-00042 Page 2 of 4 engagement agreement from LAP however, Counsel has been advised that LAP no longer has those materials, 9. It is Counsel’s recollection that Counsel represented Sun Hee Park in connection with forfeiture proceedings of her vehicle. It is Counsel's belief that the forfeiture proceedings arose out of the same investigation for which Mr. Kang was indicted. 10. It is also Counsel’s recollection that Counsel advised law enforcement agents that Counsel represented Sun Hee Park. This occurred at Sun Hee Park’s residence at a time when officers attempted to conduct a warrantless search of her residence and attempted to interview her. Consequently, Counsel believes that he did have discussions with Sun Hee Park regarding law enforcement’s investigation of her. 11, However, Counsel did not represent Sun Hee Park in the criminal case filed against her in CRI3-00036, ‘The Guam Rules of Professional Conduct provide: Rule 1.7 addresses conflicts of interests regarding current clients. It provides: (@ Except as provided in paragraph (b), a lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation involves a concurrent conflict of interest. A concurrent conflict of interest exists (1) the representation of one client will be directly adverse to another client; or (2) there is a significant risk that the representation of one or more clients will be materially limited by the lawyer’s responsibilities to another client, a former client or a third person or by a personal interest of the lawyer. Ms. Park and Mr. Kang are not concurrent clients. Counsel previously represented Ms. Park in a forfeiture action arising from the same investigation. Counsel now represents Mr. Kang in the appeal of his sentence and conviction arising from the same investigation. It is Counsel's reasonable belief that the representation of Mr. Kang is not directly adverse to Ms. Park. Rule 1.7(a)(1). On appeal, Mr. Kang will be asserting legal errors that will have no impact on Ms. Park. Ms. Park has been convicted and sentenced in her case. Nor, is there material limitation in representation. Rule 1.7(a)(2). Ms. Park’s case is done. Mr. Kang’s involves appellate, legal issues, based upon an established record. Rule 1.9 addresses a lawyer's duties to former clients. It provides: (a) A lawyer who, has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter represent another person in the same or a substantially related matter in which that Suite 802 * DNA Building * 238 Archbishop Flores Street * Hagatiia, Guam 96910 Case 1:12-cHUear: GUdtricht Loe tiled GD 4712845 Page 2 of 20