COEUR d'ALENE — Kootenai County public defenders will continue to represent the man accused of murdering Coeur d'Alene Police Sgt. Greg Moore despite attempts from prosecutors to have the Public Defender’s Office disqualified.

Jonathan Renfro, a 26-year-old Rathdrum resident accused of killing Moore in a Coeur d'Alene neighborhood on May, 5, 2015, faces the death penalty if found guilty. During a hearing at the Kootenai County jail on Friday morning, District Court Judge Lansing Haynes heard motions from the prosecution and defense teams in the case, beginning with a motion asking the judge to remove the public defenders from the case.

Kootenai County Deputy Prosecutor David Robbins said the public defenders argued in September that because there is inadequate funding to defend Renfro, the man’s constitutional rights are being violated by the prosecution’s pursuit of the death penalty. Robbins said that was equivalent to an admission by the defense team that they are unable to provide an adequate defense for Renfro.

"The state must emphatically reiterate to the court that we have not seen any ineffective counsel," Robbins said. "(But) a lawyer cannot take a case unless they are competent to do so. The solution is not to dismiss the case, the solution is to get new counsel."

Capital cases, Robbins added, are far more likely to be overturned when they are appealed. He also said that by alleging they do not have the funds to provide adequate defense, the public defenders are "willfully injecting a taint into the proceedings."

"They must be removed, disqualified, and new counsel must be appointed," Robbins said.

Kootenai County Public Defender Linda Paine noted to Haynes the prosecution was essentially using an argument — lack of funding for the public defender's office — that Renfro's attorneys used in an attempt to preclude the death penalty from the case. Haynes, Paine added, "shot down" that line of reasoning in an earlier decision.

"But if you believe it now, that's what this court should do," Paine said, adding ruling in favor of the prosecution's motion would be costly because the closest death penalty-qualified attorney is in Payette. "I'm having a hard time believing the state would suggest this, go out and cost taxpayers millions of dollars."

"If it is expensive, so be it," Robbins argued in response. "Cost does not factor into this. It's about justice, not financial calculus."

Following the arguments, Haynes announced he was denying the prosecution's motion, and he had some degree of concern his reasoning would appear as an attack directed toward the prosecutors.

"I tend to view this as a bit of posturing," Haynes said. "I tend to view this as a bit of tit-for-tat. That's just an opinion though, and it's worth what a person pays for it: next to nothing."

There is every reason to believe, Haynes added, that Renfro has had effective legal representation.

"They have argued well, constructively and forcefully," Haynes said, adding the original argument made by the defense team felt exaggerated. "I do not think one can accept they are prevented from effective assistance of counsel by a lack of funds."

Haynes also ruled in favor of a motion made by Renfro's defense team to postpone the originally scheduled trial date in February 2017 because it needs more time to prepare for the trial. The new date for the jury trial, which Haynes said could last up to eight weeks, is tentatively scheduled for April 3, 2017.