Glenn F., Matter of
| Decision Date | 21 February 1986 |
| Parties | In the Matter of GLENN F. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Rose H. Sconiers, Buffalo by Christopher Jones, for appellant.
Eugene Pigott, Jr., Erie Co. Atty., Buffalo, for respondent.
Before COLLAHAN, J.P., and DENMAN, BOOMER, O'DONNELL and SCHNEPP, JJ.
At a joint fact-finding hearing, respondents, represented by the same court-assigned law guardian, were adjudicated juvenile delinquents on the ground that they had stolen an automobile battery. The adjudication was premised on accessorial liability (Penal Law, art 20). The right of a defendant to receive effective assistance of counsel may be substantially impaired if one lawyer simultaneously represents the conflicting interests of other defendants (People v. Macerola, 47 N.Y.2d 257, 262, 417 N.Y.S.2d 908, 391 N.E.2d 990; People v. Gomberg, 38 N.Y.2d 307, 312, 379 N.Y.S.2d 769, 342 N.E.2d 550; People v. Davis, 72 A.D.2d 69, 72, 423 N.Y.S.2d 98). On this record, it cannot be said that there was no possibility of prejudice as a result of the joint representation (see People v. Philip L.S., 57 N.Y.2d 820, 821, 455 N.Y.S.2d 594, 441 N.E.2d 1112).
In these situations a weighty responsibility is imposed upon the hearing court to determine whether defendants' decision to proceed with one attorney is an informed one (People v. Gomberg, supra, 38 N.Y.2d p. 313; 379 N.Y.S.2d 769, 342 N.E.2d 550; People v. Davis, supra, 72 A.D.2d p. 72, 423 N.Y.S.2d 98). "[B]efore the formal commencement of trial, it is the responsibility of the Trial Judge, independent of the attorney's obligation to inform his clients of any conflicting interests which may hinder his representation, to 'ascertain, on the record, whether each defendant [represented by the same attorney] has an awareness of the potential risks involved in that course and has knowingly chosen it' " (People v. Macerola, supra, 47 N.Y.2d p. 263, 417 N.Y.S.2d 908, 391 N.E.2d 990, quoting People v. Gomberg, supra, 38 N.Y.2d pp. 313-314, 379 N.Y.S.2d 769, 342 N.E.2d 550). This is particularly true where, as here, the court has assigned one court-appointed attorney to represent both respondents (see People v. Davis, supra ). Since the Family Court judge failed to make satisfactory inquiry and respondents have demonstrated that there exists a significant possibility of a conflict of interest, they are entitled to a new trial (People v. Macerola, supra, 47 N.Y.2d p. 264, 417...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Victor G., Matter of
... ... 358, 90 S.Ct. 1068, 25 L.Ed.2d 368 that the standard in juvenile delinquency cases was proof beyond a reasonable doubt rather than by a preponderance of the evidence, as had been the rule. Similarly, in Matter of Glenn F., 117 A.D.2d 1013, 499 N.Y.S.2d 557, the Court reversed delinquency findings against two respondents who were represented by the same law guardian and there was a possible conflict of interest in the joint representation. Again, in Matter of Yolanda C., 118 A.D.2d 778, 500 N.Y.S.2d 285, the ... ...
-
People v. Vara
... ... and the testimony upon which it ... relied cannot be deemed "incredible as a matter of law" (People v. Smith, 77 A.D.2d 544, 546, 430 N.Y.S.2d 95; see People v. Garafolo, 44 A.D.2d 86, 88, 353 N.Y.S.2d 500, revd. on remand 48 A.D.2d ... ...
-
Brian J.C., Matter of
... ... Gomberg, 38 N.Y.2d 307, 313, 379 N.Y.S.2d 769, 342 N.E.2d 550; Matter of Glenn F., App.Div., 499 N.Y.S.2d 557. We have considered the remaining claims raised and find none requires ... ...
-
William J.K., Matter of
... ... February 21, 1986 ... Rose H. Sconiers, Buffalo by Christopher Jones, for appellant. Eugene Pigott, Jr., Buffalo, for respondent ... Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and new trial granted. Same Memorandum as in Matter of Glenn F., App.Div., 499 N.Y.S.2d 557, decided herewith. (Appeal from Order of Erie County Family Court, Sedita, J.--Juvenile Delinquency.) ... CALLAHAN, J.P., and DENMAN, BOOMER, O'DONNELL ... ...