People v. Schiskie

• Decision Date: 26 June 1980
• Citation: 76 A.D.2d 1017,429 N.Y.S.2d 317
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. John R. SCHISKIE, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 317

429 N.Y.S.2d 317

76 A.D.2d 1017

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v.John R. SCHISKIE, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

June 26, 1980.

Ian R. Arcus, Albany, for appellant

Sol Greenberg, Albany County Dist. Atty., Albany(F. Patrick Jeffers, Albany, of counsel), for respondent

Before MAHONEY, P. J., and SWEENEY, KANE, CASEY and HERLIHY, JJ.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County, rendered July 12, 1979, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree.

At all stages of proceedings in the trial court, defendant was represented by the Albany County Public Defender as assigned counsel.The only issue of substance raised on this appeal is a claim that he was denied effective legal assistance because the head of that office, Douglas P. Rutnik, is the brother of Christopher P. Rutnik, the Albany County Assistant District Attorney who signed the indictment and appeared on behalf of the prosecution at his arraignment.We reject this contention and affirm the judgment.

A broad range of social, personal or professional relationships might exist between attorneys who represent opposing parties or interests.Some, such as marriage, might fairly be regarded as presenting a conflict of interest (cf.New York State Bar Assn. Committee on Professional Ethics, Opn. No. 409(Aug.1975)), while others, such as membership in the same national organization, are so tenuous in nature or degree that not even the appearance of impropriety could be detected.Here nothing beyond the mere fact of kinship was adduced, and there is nothing to suggest that confidential...