Did the court of appeals err in denying Petitioner—whose trial counsel had a conflict of interest because his child was applying for a job at the U.S. Attorney's Office during his representation of Petitioner—a remand for a hearing to determine whether that conflict adversely affected trial counsel's representation under the Sixth Amendment?

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Did the court of appeals err in denying Petitioner—whose trial counsel had a conflict of interest because his child was applying for a job at the U.S. Attorney’s Office during his representation of Petitioner—a remand for a hearing to determine whether that conflict adversely affected trial counsel’s representation under the Sixth Amendment? ii RULE 14.1(b) CERTIFICATE Petitioner certifies as follows: qa) Parties: The parties who appeared before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and in the District of Columbia Circuit in the proceedings that resulted in the judgment from which this writ of certiorari is sought were Petitioner Abdul Samuels (U.S. Ct. App No 19-3078) and Respondent the United States of America. Lonnell Tucker and Anthony Fields were codefendants at trial. James Venable, Darryl Smith, and Lacy Hamilton pleaded guilty in the District Court. Defendant Calvin Wright was acquitted, and Artemis Wilson was a fugitive. (ai)