People v. Perez
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
The trial court’s failure to conduct a Gomberg inquiry (People v Gomberg, 38 NY2d 307) was not reversible error. In the course of his preparation for trial, defendant’s counsel, a member of the Legal Aid Society, examined the confidential file of the People’s chief witness who was a client of another Legal Aid attorney on a prior unrelated charge. Defendant has not shown that this created a conflict of interest or even a significant possibility thereof (see, People v Lombardo, 61 NY2d 97, 103).
Unlike People…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- People v. GombergNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- People v. McDonaldNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- People v. LombardoNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- People v. MattisonNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
3Cited by22 opinions
- People v. AbarNew York Court of Appeals · 2003
- People v. SmartNew York Court of Appeals · 2001
- Austin v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1992
- Hertz v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1988
- People v. MedinaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.