People v. Winkler

The primary issue presented on these appeals is whether the defendant was deprived of effective assistance of counsel by virtue of a contingency fee arrangement between the defendant and his attorney. As the Court of Appeals held in People v Winkler (71 NY2d 592, 596), "fees contingent upon achieving a specific result in a criminal case are wrong * * * [yet] such agreements do not collaterally constitute a per se violation of a criminal defendant’s constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel”. The defendant bears the burden of demonstrating the alleged ineffectiveness by showing…