Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta People v. Ortiz 49 N.Y.2d 718

← Cases

People v. Ortiz

49 N.Y.2d 718 Court N.Y. Decision date 1980-02-05 English

Contents

Majority

p. 718
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v William Ortiz, Appellant.
Argued January 3,1980;
decided February 5, 1980
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Louis G. Adolfsen and John A. K. Bradley for appellant.
Mario Merola, District Attorney (Daniel Taub and Alan D. Marrus of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order appealed from should be affirmed. The court specifically alerted defendant to the possibility that a conflict of interest might flow from joint representation of defendant

p. 719
and a codefendant by the same attorney, and informed defendant of his right to separate counsel.- Despite this admonition, defendant insisted on continued joint representation. Having determined to persist in that course of action, defendant may not subsequently contend that he was deprived of effective assistance of counsel because of a possible conflict of interest arising from that joint representation (see People v Gomberg, 38 NY2d 307 ; cf. People v Macerola, 47 NY2d 257 ).

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Cases cited