Did the denial of Westley Kennedy's right to conflict-free counsel constitute a structural error or a breakdown of the adversarial process that requires vacatur of his guilty plea without any additional showing of prejudice?

Question Presented The Sixth Amendment guaranteed Westley Kennedy the right to counsel with undivided loyalties. The government knew that Kennedy’s court-appointed lawyer was also representing, in a related case, Tawan Carter, a cooperating defendant who incriminated Kennedy. Both men were charged with identical conspiracies (possibly the same conspiracy) and both pleaded guilty, but Carter got a 46-month sentence while Kennedy got 20 years. Did the denial Kennedy’s right to conflict-free counsel, which the prosecution could have cured at any stage but did not, constitute either a structural error or a breakdown of the adversarial process that requires vacatur of Kennedy’s guilty plea without any additional showing of prejudice? ii