Legal Opinion

People v. Perez

New York Court of Appeals

Decided October 8, 1987PublishedCited by 22 opinions

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

  1. People v. GombergNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
  2. People v. McDonaldNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
  3. People v. LombardoNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
  4. People v. MattisonNew York Court of Appeals · 1986

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. People v. AbarNew York Court of Appeals · 2003
  2. People v. SmartNew York Court of Appeals · 2001
  3. Austin v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1992
  4. Hertz v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1988
  5. 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.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API