No. 23-5541

Mark A. Hartle v. New York

Lower Court: New York
Docketed: 2023-09-07
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: conflict-of-interest criminal-defense due-process ineffective-assistance-of-counsel judicial-inquiry professional-ethics professional-responsibility prosecutorial-misconduct right-to-counsel trial-strategy
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2023-11-03
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Is a criminal defendant denied their right to effective assistance of counsel when there are indications, of which the defendant was unaware, that trial counsel's trial strategy was impacted by their prior representation of the prosecutor in connection the prosecutor's professional misconduct where the trial court was aware of the prior representation but did not inform the defendant or undertake an inquiry into potential conflicts?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Is a criminal defendant denied their right to effective assistance of counsel when there are indications, of which the defendant was unaware, that trial counsel’s trial strategy was impacted by their prior representation of the prosecutor in connection the prosecutor’s professional misconduct where the trial court was aware of the prior representation but did not inform the defendant or undertake an inquiry into potential conflicts? i

Docket Entries

2023-11-06
Petition DENIED.
2023-10-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/3/2023.
2023-09-27
Waiver of right of respondent New York to respond filed.
2023-07-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 10, 2023)

Attorneys

Mark Hartle
John Anthony CirandoDJ & JA CIRANDO PLLC, Petitioner
John Anthony CirandoDJ & JA CIRANDO PLLC, Petitioner
New York
Matthew L. PeabodySt. Lawrence County District Attorney's Office, Respondent
Matthew L. PeabodySt. Lawrence County District Attorney's Office, Respondent