People v. Baffi
| Decision Date | 18 March 1980 |
| Citation | 404 N.E.2d 737,49 N.Y.2d 820,427 N.Y.S.2d 615 |
| Parties | , 404 N.E.2d 737 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. George BAFFI, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Defendant George Baffi appeals, on grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel, from his conviction of possession of gambling records in the first degree, and promoting gambling in the second degree.
George and his brothers Albert and Nicholas were identically charged in a single indictment, based on evidence gathered in the search of an apartment pursuant to a warrant.
George and Nicholas were present in the apartment when the police, with a no-knock warrant, broke in through a rear window to search for gambling records and paraphernalia; Albert entered the apartment while the search was in progress. The police found various gambling records in the apartment and on the persons of George and Albert, but not on Nicholas. The police also noted certain spontaneous statements made by George during the search.
At trial one attorney represented all three defendants. The jury convicted George and Albert, but acquitted Nicholas.
During the course of a pretrial suppression hearing the attorney for the three defendants made this statement: The trial court gave no response and made no further inquiry, nor did the defendants, who were apparently present, make any statements.
Although the trial court may place some reliance on the statement by counsel that he has informed his clients of the pitfalls of joint representation and gotten their consent (People v. Gomberg, 38 N.Y.2d 307, 379 N.Y.S.2d 769, 342 N.E.2d 550), such a statement alone does not relieve the trial court of the obligation "independent of the attorney's obligation" (People v. Macerola, 47 N.Y.2d 257, 263, 417 N.Y.S.2d 908, 391...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Cortez
...of the potential pitfalls” posed by the conflict ( id. at 263, 417 N.Y.S.2d 908, 391 N.E.2d 990). And, in People v. Baffi, 49 N.Y.2d 820, 822, 427 N.Y.S.2d 615, 404 N.E.2d 737 (1980) we reiterated that “[a]lthough the trial court may place some reliance on the statement by counsel that he h......
-
People v. Slavik
...did exist, a new trial must be ordered ..." (at page 264, 417 N.Y.S.2d 908, 391 N.E.2d 990). See also People v. Baffi, 49 N.Y.2d 820, 427 N.Y.S.2d 615, 404 N.E.2d 737 (1980). Thus, the Macerola Court recognized that a defendant might be hard pressed to show actual prejudice in the trial rec......
-
People v. Recupero
...that should have been pursued for each defendant such that the potential for conflict actually operated (People v. Baffi, 49 N.Y.2d 820, 822, 427 N.Y.S.2d 615, 404 N.E.2d 737). Notwithstanding the absence of such a showing, however, the dissent would reverse, urging upon the court a per se ......
-
People v. Ortero
...the joint representation. (See People v. Fioretti, 49 N.Y.2d 976, --- N.Y.S.2d ----, --- N.E.2d ---- (1980); People v. Baffi, 49 N.Y.2d 820, 427 N.Y.S.2d 615, 404 N.E.2d 737 (1980); People v. Macerola, 47 N.Y.2d 257, 417 N.Y.S.2d 908, 391 N.E.2d 990; People v. Gomberg, 38 N.Y.2d 307, 379 N.......