BECKLEY, W.V. (LOOTPRESS) – During a pretrial hearing on Wednesday, Feb. 24, Defense Attorney Kris Kostenko stated that his client, Tremaine Jackson, demanded he file a motion to withdraw council due to a failure to communicate.
Jackson is currently being held at Southern Regional Jail after being charged with murder, conspiracy and felon in possession of a firearm. Jackson was arrested in Aug. of 2020 in connection to the murder of Troy Williams in the Pet Supplies Parking lot in Beckley in May of 2020.
Kostenko told Judge Burnside that he had met with Jackson at Southern Regional Jail on and off in recent weeks, and during these meetings, Jackson concluded that he could no longer communicate with his council. He wrote this statement in a letter, which he presented to Kostenko, demanding the defense attorney present it to the court.
When asked by Judge Burnside what matters he and Jackson could not agree on, Kostenko said he could not give specifics but did state that it was related to aspects of the matter of trial.
Kostenko said that Jackson planned to retain other council to represent him in the matter but had not secured other council at the time of Wednesday’s hearing.
Arguing against the motion to withdraw council, Prosecuting Attorney Brian Parsons made several points, one of which referenced Kostenko’s history as a lawyer.
“Mr. Kostenko has been a practicing attorney in this circuit that has represented in every type of case from magistrate court to, I believe, murder cases. He is an experienced attorney, not a new attorney.”
Parsons continued stating that while being an experienced attorney is a valuable thing to be, sometimes, because you are so long out of law school, you don’t always know the “newest and greatest things in law.”
“So, we have Mr. Brown,” Parsons said, referring to Jackson’s second defense attorney who recently graduated from law school. “He’s as fresh as a copper penny. There are two lawyers representing Mr. Jackson- two lawyers from both ends of the spectrum as far as legal representation. There is value to that, Judge.”
Form decision making, to motions filed and objections made to the state’s motions, Parsons said that the state and himself, from a professional standpoint as an officer of the court, has witnessed nothing inherent that could suggest that Kostenko has not been acting zealously in this case.
“He is a lawyer, not a magician. He can’t make witnesses appear, and he can’t make them change their testimony,” Parsons said of Kostenko.
Aside from the defense’s proactiveness in the case, Parsons referenced two cases he felt supported his argument. The first, Watson v. Black, was a 1977 case that stated the defendant needed to request a change in council on good faith and that any action not made in good faith need not be accepted by the court.
“Is this defendant acting in good faith? Or does just want a lawyer to say wants he wants to hear?” Parsons asked. “What is it about Kostenko’s representation that he can’t deal with? If the problem is that he is asking Mr. Kostenko to do something unethical and not in good faith, or impossible, or illegal, then I believe it falls in that range.”
The second case, State v. Sheppard, was a 1983 case in which “on the eve of trial” the defendant wanted new council to delay the proceedings.
Parsons stated that he believed Jackson was only requesting new council to delay his trial date, which is set for early next week.
“On the eve of trial, well, that’s where we are,” Parsons said. “The defendant knows there is a number of witnesses ready against him that is damaging to his case. He also knows the longer cases continue that people disappear, people get scared and people die. At this point, a delay only serves as a prejudice against the state and a benefit to Mr. Jackson, who I do not believe in acting in good faith. Allowing this makes a mockery of the system, and it is not justice for the state.”
After confirming with Kostenko that Jackson never asked his defense to do anything illegal, unethical or against the rules, Judge Burnside agreed with the state’s points and denied the defense’s motion to withdraw council.
“This demand by Mr. Jackson is very likely to be in bad faith. I can’t say for sure, there may be some other context, but this trial starts Monday. That’s really close,” he said. “Council on both sides has spent many hours on preparation and researching getting ready for trial. For all these reasons this motion must be denied.”
Jackson’s trial date is set for March 1, 2021.
