relators are not entitled to representation by the prosecutor’s office under R.C. 309.09, because of the conflict of interest inherent in concurrently defending a party and prosecuting that same party. Relators argue that they are entitled to representation under R.C. 305.14, which allows appointment of, and payment for, outside counsel under the following circumstances: “The court of common pleas, upon the application of the prosecuting attorney and the board of county commissioners, may authorize the board to employ legal counsel to assist * * * any other county officer * * * in the defense of any action or proceeding in which such * * * officer is a party or has an interest, in its offici 639 N.E.2d 1159 (Douglas, J., concurring), quoting Black’s Law Dictionary (6th Ed.1990) 351 (<HOLDING>). {¶ 19} Under R.C. Title 35 and the authority
holding that both saline county and grant county had jurisdiction to try the appellant for murder where the actual killing occurred in one county but the acts requisite to the consummation of the murder and the subsequent disposal of the body occurred in the other county holding that the grant county prosecutor had a statutory duty to be legal advisor to the county clerk even though she was not embroiled in litigation in which the county was the real party in interest holding a county and a road district had standing to sue state highway commission and county tax collector based on their interest in and control over the public roads of the county holding that county and district attorneys are officers within the judicial department recognizing county officers as  those whose general authority and jurisdiction are confined within the limits of the county in which they are appointed who are appointed in and for a particular county and whose duties apply only to that county and through whom the county performs its usual political functions 