Is there a conflict of interest in the assignment of counsel to represent an indigent defendant?

People v. Mungia (2008) 44 Cal.4th 1101, 1122, 81 Cal.Rptr.3d 614, 189 P.3d 880; see United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez (2006) 548 U.S. 140, 151, 165 L.Ed.2d 409, 126 S.Ct. 2557.) Section 987.2 governs the assignment of counsel to represent criminal defendants unable to afford to employ an attorney. As relevant here, it provides: [T]he court shall first utilize the services of the public defender to provide criminal defense services for indigent defendants. In the event that the public defender is unavailable and the county and the courts have contracted with one or more responsible attorneys or with a panel of attorneys to provide criminal defense services for indigent defendants, the court shall utilize the services of the county-contracted attorneys prior to assigning any other private counsel. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to require the appointment of counsel in any case in which the counsel has a conflict of interest. In the interest of justice, a court may depart from that portion of the procedure requiring appointment of a county-contracted attorney after making a finding of good cause and stating the reasons therefor on the record. ( 987.2, subd. (d), italics added.)