Whether a conflict arises when trial counsel's concurrent representation ends prior to trial

QUESTION PRESENTED The questions presented are: 1. Whether a conflict arises, thereby compelling federal courts to follow Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335 (1980), when trial counsel's concurrent representation occurs during critical stages of the district court proceedings, but ends prior to trial. 2. Whether the District Court's imposition of a sentence enhancement not found by the jury violates Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99 (2013), thereby making summary reversal appropriate. 3. Whether the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial is violated when a trial court instructs the jury that “interference with commerce by robbery is a crime of violence” in a case where neither the Indictment nor the final instructions to the jury specify the underlying theory of the crime of violence. i RULE 14.1(b) CERTIFICATE Petitioner certifies as follows: (i) Parties. The parties who appeared before the District Court of the Virgin Islands and the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, in the proceedings that resulted in the judgment from which a writ of certiorari is sought were Petitioner Ron Delano Kuntz and Respondent United States of America. Keaon Wilson and Shawn McIntosh were also co-Defendants in the District Court. Further, Jermaine Ayala, Wahilli James, Shaquielle Correa, Devon Davis and Robert Brown entered guilty pleas in the District Court. (ii) |