WILKES-BARRE — Demetrius Fannick is still serving as accused killer Harlow Cuadra’s attorney, but Cuadra’s conflict counsel hasn’t been allowed to step down.
Cuadra, 26, and his co-defendant Joseph Kerekes, 34, were in Luzerne County Court on Wednesday during a pre-trial status conference before county Judge Peter Paul Olszewski Jr. Several issues were discussed during the hearing, but Olszewski didn’t rule on two key issues: whether Fannick can represent Cuadra, and if prosecutors must reveal if they believe Kerekes was an accomplice or the principle suspect in the murder of Bryan Kocis at his Back Mountain home in January 2007.
Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty against the two men from Virginia Beach, Va., who are accused of slaying gay pornography producer Kocis and setting fire to his Dallas Township home to try to lure a talent to their fledgling business.
Kerekes’ attorneys argued in prior motions prosecutors must say whether they believe their client is just an accomplice in the murder. If he was just an accomplice, prosecutors cannot pursue the death penalty, Kerekes’ conflict counsel John Pike, Mark Bufalino and Shelly Centini said.
Assistant District Attorney Mike Melnick said the commonwealth would be “in a box” if it disclosed one theory about the murder at this stage and it turned out to be incorrect.
“That has had catastrophic impact” on prosecution cases in the past, he said.
Olszewski wouldn’t allow Cuadra’s former attorneys to step down until the issue over potential conflict with Fannick is resolved. Fannick took over as Cuadra’s counsel Jan. 28 for conflict counsel Stephen Menn, Michael Senape and Paul Galante.
Prosecutors argue Fannick cannot represent Cuadra because he already met several times with Kerekes, creating a conflict of interest.
Olszewski told attorneys to file briefs on the issue by Feb. 29. Kerekes’ attorneys are supposed to answer whether an actual or potential conflict exists, whether Kerekes can legally waive a consent of conflict of interest and if he wants to do so.
The two issues and others will likely be addressed at another pre-trial status hearing at 8:30 a.m. March 5.