A Manchester lawyer asked a judge to reconsider disqualifying her from representing Owen Labrie in his bid for a new trial, which is based on a claim that famed Boston lawyer J.W. Carney provided him ineffective counsel.

Jaye Rancourt filed a motion on Friday in Merrimack County Superior Court in Concord claiming Judge Larry Smukler’s May 24 order disqualifying her contained “two fundamental errors.”

First, Smukler overlooked the fact that he authorized Labrie’s waiver of her presence at trial, Rancourt argued. And second, she disagreed with Smukler’s assessment that disqualifying her would cause only “minimal” hardship to Labrie.

Now 20, Labrie is free on bail after being convicted last August of the May 30, 2014, sexual assault against a 15-year-old girl while they were both students at St. Paul’s School in Concord.

“Mr. Labrie and Attorney Rancourt have developed a strong relationship built upon the trust developed in working together for over seven months,” Rancourt wrote.

Labrie wants her to continue to represent him, she said. “To deprive Mr. Labrie of counsel of his choosing and to remove the attorney that he trusts is a hardship,” Rancourt wrote.

Smukler’s ruling requires Labrie to retain new local counsel and to pay attorneys twice to do the same extensive amount of work done in the last seven months, Rancourt wrote. That includes meeting with witnesses, working with a private investigator, and conducting countless hours of legal research and independent investigation.

“Mr. Labrie has been financially responsible for this work,” Rancourt said.

The motion included a signed statement from Labrie. “It is my belief that, if (Rancourt’s) disqualification stands, I would be severely prejudiced in this matter, given the work that has been done on my behalf since November, 2015,” Labrie wrote.

Labrie was sentenced to one year in jail after being convicted on Aug. 28, 2015, of sexually assaulting a 15-year-old girl who was a freshman at the school when he was a graduating senior.

The jury found him guilty of felony computer services prohibited, three counts of misdemeanor sexual assault, and one count of endangering the welfare of a child. The Tunbridge, Vt., man will also have to register for life as a sex offender.

Rancourt had served as local counsel before Labrie’s trial and said she worked only 40 billable and non-billable hours on the case before trial.

Rancourt based the ineffective counsel claim on a number of issues at trial and focused on trial counsel’s failure to more vigorously challenge the felony charge involving using a computer to lure the girl until after Labrie was found guilty.

Labrie was recently again released on bail. Smukler had revoked bail because Labrie violated curfew, but he reinstated it with additional conditions after Labrie appealed to the state Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court wrote that Labrie would likely serve out his year-long sentence before his appeal was finished if the revocation wasn’t amended.

The family of Labrie’s victim recently sued St. Paul’s School saying it was aware of the tradition of “Senior Salute,” in which senior boys compete to have sex with younger girls, but did nothing about it. The federal lawsuit claims the school failed to protect the children in its care.

Her representation of Labrie on his ineffective assistance claims “creates no potential for conflict” under the Rules of Professional Conduct, Rancourt wrote.

In his order, Smukler said Rancourt can’t claim ineffective counsel since she helped represent Labrie.

Smukler wrote: “Here, (Rancourt) was part of the defense team she now claims was ineffective. As a member of that team and as an attorney who actively participated in certain aspects of the trial and continued to have her name on all of the defendant’s pleadings following the waiver of her presence, she will likely be a witness in the defendant’s claim of ineffective assistance.”

Rancourt said Smukler mischaracterized the exchange relieving her of the need to attend trial on a day-to-day basis.

“If the Court intended to hold Attorney Rancourt accountable to Mr. Labrie for any actions taken or not taken by trial counsel during the trial, then the Court should not have excused her presence,” Rancourt argued.

She said Smukler also relied on the fact that her name was affixed to motions filed after her presence was excused, but she never reviewed or signed them.