THE PEOPLE &C., RESPONDENT, v. WAYNE KIESER, APPELLANT.
79 N.Y.2d 936, 591 N.E.2d 1174, 582 N.Y.S.2d 988 (1992).
March 31, 1992
2 No. 134 SSM 3
Decided March 31, 1992
_________________________________________________________________
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
publication in the New York Reports.
Submitted by Steven Demetrios Ateshoglou, for Appellant.
Submitted by Alexander P. Schlinger, for Respondent.
MEMORANDUM:
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
We agree with that Court's conclusion that under the circumstances of
this case, the failure of defendant's counsel, who at the time of
defendant's trial was an attorney in good standing and duly licensed
to practice law in New Jersey, to secure admission pro hac vice to
practice in New York, did not affect his professional qualifications
or competence such as to deprive defendant of his right to counsel
under the Federal and New York State Constitutions. Nor did counsel's
temporary suspension to practice law in New Jersey for nonpayment of
bar dues at the time he represented defendant deprive defendant of his
right to counsel.
In People v Felder (47 NY2d 287), we held that where the defendant in
a criminal proceeding had unknowingly been represented by a layman
masquerading as an attorney, but who was not licensed to practice law,
the defendant's right to counsel as guaranteed by the Federal and New
York State Constitutions was violated and therefore, his conviction
must be set aside whether or not defendant was prejudiced by the
representation. We expressly left open, however, the issue of whether
a defendant's representation by a lawyer who was temporarily not
entitled to practice law may violate a defendant's constitutional
right to counsel (id. at 294, n 6).
Although the defendant's right to counsel is guaranteed by the Sixth
Amendment of the Federal Constitution and article I, section 6 of the
New York Constitution (US Const, Amendments 6, 14; NY Const Art I,
6), not every defect in an individual's ability to practice law
renders his representation a deprivation of that right. Thus, courts
SNIPPETS:
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York
for Appellant.
We agree with that Court's conclusion that under the circumstances of this case, the failure
Nor did counsel's temporary suspension to practice law in New Jersey for nonpayment of bar
In People v Felder, we held that where the defendant in a criminal proceeding had unknowingly
We expressly left open, however, the issue of whether a defendant's representation by a
Although the defendant's right to counsel is guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment of the Federal
Thus, courts have distinguished between those defects that are "technical", i.e. those
469 So 2d 142, 143) and those that are "serious and substantive" (United States v Novak, supra at
We conclude that his temporary administrative suspension and his failure to be admitted pro
|
