Lawyers clash in Zebb Quinn murder case; documents reveal details in mystery

ASHEVILLE — A judge on Thursday quashed an attempt by prosecutors to separate the man accused of killing Zebb Quinn, who disappeared in 2000, from the lawyers defending him.

The prosecution, led by Buncombe County District Attorney Todd Williams, contended in court documents that capital defender Vicki Jayne and prominent Asheville defense attorney Sean Devereux have a “conflict of interest so severe as to be non-waivable” in defending Robert Jason Owens.

After speaking with the opposing counsel and briefly questioning Owens in court, Superior Court Judge Gary Gavenus said that claim didn't hold water.

"All of the grounds the state alleges are conflicts of interest, I can't find that any of those exist or that any of those are likely to exist," he said.

Jayne and Devereux, in their written rebuttal, accused Williams of interfering with Owens’ constitutional right to counsel in favor of convenience.

MORE: All our coverage of Owens, the Codds and Quinn

“Perhaps, what Mr. Williams fears more than the theoretical ineffectiveness of Ms. Jayne and Mr. Devereux is their odds of being increasing effective as the case proceeds,” the defense wrote, responding to the prosecution’s request for a judge to examine whether Owens attorneys are fit to defend him.

This week’s hearing highlighted deep-seated divisions between counselors and sets the stage for one of Buncombe County's biggest criminal trials in recent memory. Court documents filed in the hearing also reveal new details about Quinn’s disappearance.

In the documents

All parties involved in the Quinn case are well acquainted, and they have been since 2015, when Owens was charged with murdering and dismembering Joseph “J.T.” Codd and Christie Shoen Codd, who was pregnant when she was killed.

Jayne and Devereux were appointed to defend Owens, who pleaded guilty to the murders last April. Williams and his team prosecuted the case, which ended with Owens being sentenced to at least 59.5 years in prison.

Jayne and Devereux, in court documents, wrote that Owens told them about what happened to Quinn shortly after they were appointed to defend him. Owens said a family member, whom neither the defense nor the prosecution name in official documents, killed Quinn and then dismembered him and burned the remains.

Jayne and Devereux provided to prosecutors and law enforcement Owens’ “detailed account of Quinn’s death,” which included that evidence of the murder might be found in the Bent Creek Experimental Forest.

In late May 2015, law enforcement interviewed Owens about Quinn’s disappearance; prosecutors and Owens’ attorneys were present. Law enforcement never completed the interview, however, leaving early to examine the Bent Creek site where they believed they might find evidence. What they did or didn’t find there has not been released to the public since.

But that interview was a key portion of Williams’ argument that Jayne and Devereux have a conflict in the Quinn case.

Conflict

A defendant admits guilt when he or she enters a guilty plea, meaning that convictions from plea deals are generally difficult to appeal or overturn in court. One of the few avenues a defendant has to a challenge a plea is to claim that he or she had ineffective assistance of counsel.

The specter of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim is the basis for the conflict prosecutors allege against Jayne and Devereux in the Quinn case, according to court documents filed by both the defense and the prosecution.

After the ruling, DA Williams, who wasn't in court Thursday, said his office brought up the potential conflict as a matter of proper process.

"This motion was filed as a preventative measure to reduce the chance of a mistrial as we move forward in the prosecution of the Zebb Quinn case," he said.

The conflict, as prosecutors perceived it, was rooted in a letter Owens sent to his wife from the Madison County Jail after he pleaded guilty to murdering the Codds. Gavenus has not made Owens' letter public, but Assistant District Attorney Alex Bass reveals relevant details in court documents.

In the letter, Owens told his wife that he was "forced to take the plea" in the Codd case and that the plea wasn't based on "the factual basis given by the prosecutor or my counsel." He also writes that he "intends to challenge his prior plea."

Therein was the conflict according to the prosecution. The defense disagreed, and so did Gavenus, who said in court that "the contents of that letter is the primary reason we are here today."

In the spirit of clearing the air, Gavenus walked Owens through his plea in the Schoen-Codd case just to make sure that his feelings about his counsel hadn't changed since. Owens' responses were short, but he made clear that he is happy with his counsel and thinks they were effective in the previous case.

Even if Owens didn't feel that way, his defense argued in writing that the legal standard for determining ineffective assistance of counsel, set by the Supreme Court, is not easy to meet.

Jayne and Devereux said that such a claim would hinge on its decision, in 2015, to allow Owens to be interviewed by law enforcement regarding Quinn's disappearance — a decision, they say, doesn't expose them to an ineffective assistance of counsel claim.

“Failing to obtain the confession he wanted, DA Williams is now determined to separated Jason Owens from lawyers who believe his account,” Jayne and Devereux wrote in court documents. “Certainly, lawyers who submit to the State’s theory of the case — share the State’s tunnel vision — would be more convenient for him.”

To trial

With the debate over who will represent whom in the rear-view, all parties can continue preparing for trial, which Jayne said will likely begin this fall. She said after the hearing Thursday that she and Devereux are shooting to start in October, but that could change depending on other pending litigation.

Sensing the bitterness of the fight over the matter he had just resolved, Judge Gavenus took a moment Thursday to try and set the tone for the coming trial.

He dressed down both the prosecution and the defense for having "based arguments on ad hominem attacks on opposing counsel" in court documents and including information with "absolutely no evidentiary value."

"That is of concern for me," he told the opposing counsels. "There is no place in this case, or in any case, for any of that."

Addressing the judge's statements after the hearing, Devereux said that "criminal trials are a contact sport." But he and Jayne also clarified that any criticism they leveled against the prosecution was directed at the district attorney, not at ADA Bass, who was handling the matter in court Thursday.

Jayne and Devereux explained that they meant no disrespect to the court and that any bitterness was born when police, with the district attorney's approval, attempted to question Owens about Quinn without his attorneys present after he pleaded guilty in the Schoen-Codd matter.

Justified or not, as the defense and the prosecution continue preparing for trial they'll likely have to tread carefully. Gavenus issued a strict warning to all attorneys involved in the Quinn case before Thursday's hearing ended.

"Should this behavior continue, any or all of you might find yourselves out of this case, not by some reported conflict of interest, but by a complete failure to Rule 12," he said, referencing a rule that requires lawyers comply with the North Carolina Canons of Ethics for Arbitrators.