Sponsor of Prosecutorial Misconduct Commission Bill Expects Approval From Cuomo
A spokesman for Cuomo said on Thursday that the bill is still under review and that they are engaging with stakeholders.
August 16, 2018 at 05:33 PM
5 minute read
The sponsor of a bill that would create a commission to investigate prosecutorial misconduct said on Thursday he expects Gov. Andrew Cuomo to approve the legislation before the Monday deadline.
Assemblyman Nick Perry, D-Brooklyn, said that while changes are still being worked out, the bill is expected to receive Cuomo's approval. That's despite a memo sent earlier this week to Cuomo's office from the counsel to Attorney General Barbara Underwood, warning the bill may not survive judicial review.
“I'm very optimistic that the governor will sign the bill,” Perry said. “We have to do a little tweaking here and there, but I expect the governor will sign the bill.”
The bill's other sponsor, Sen. John DeFrancisco, R-Syracuse, was not available for comment on Thursday. The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday morning that Cuomo was planning to sign the bill. However, that same day, a spokesman for Cuomo said that the bill is still under review, and that they are engaging with stakeholders.
Perry said communications with Cuomo's office about the bill have suggested its approval. Any changes to the bill would have to come in the form of a chapter amendment, which is when the governor agrees to sign the bill with a three-way agreement from the Legislature to amend it at the next earliest opportunity. Perry said they are willing to make the changes, but it's unclear what parts of the bill will be modified.
“We are willing to make the appropriate tweaking to the bill or corrections or amendments to make sure that the bill is constitutional,” Perry said.
He was unconcerned about the memo sent earlier this week from general counsel Leslie Dubeck from the state Attorney General's Office to Cuomo's counsel Alphonso David. Dubeck pointed to several provisions of the bill that may not hold up in court, including conflicts with separation of powers in the state constitution, the judiciary and the role of a district attorney in New York.
Among her chief concerns was an issue with the balance of power imposed by the bill. The commission would be composed of 11 members, six of which would be chosen by the Legislature. Dubeck wrote that it may be deemed unconstitutional for the Legislature to choose the majority of a commission with authority over a district attorney, which is considered an executive position.
She also warned of the constitutionality of allowing sitting judges to serve on the panel and having the Court of Appeals review its decisions. Both of those provisions could be deemed unconstitutional because they impart executive powers on the state's judiciary, Dubeck wrote.
She was also concerned about the way a commission could affect the work of district attorneys, even if it does not intend to. Dubeck warned that it could influence prosecutors to prepare cases differently, which may lead to a weaker prosecution.
Perry said he and DeFrancisco were not aware of Dubeck's concerns prior to the bill's passing in June. That's not necessarily a surprise—the memo was in response to a formal request from Cuomo's office for a legal analysis, which is commonly used to assess the constitutionality of legislation. Bills that have not been approved by the Legislature do not usually receive such treatment.
The memo was followed by a letter to the state's district attorneys by Albany County District Attorney David Soares, who serves as president of the District Attorneys Association of the State of New York. Soares said in the letter that the DAASNY is preparing a constitutional challenge to the bill. Perry said he wasn't worried about the litigation.
“That's a part of the process, you know, and I'm not really worried about it. We are listening to the critiques. We are listening to the concerns expressed by people who will be affected by the bill,” Perry said.
The DAASNY has been a stalwart opponent of the legislation since it was introduced in 2015. The association declined to comment on the bill's status on Thursday.
The DAASNY has long argued that the bill is unconstitutional and unnecessary, saying lawmakers should improve the current process of disciplining attorneys in New York rather than create a new commission to address prosecutors specifically.
Each Appellate Division already has a grievance committee that reviews complaints against attorneys in New York, including prosecutors, and has the power to censure, suspend or disbar them. Those committees are composed of both attorneys and nonattorneys, and appointed by the court.
Supporters of the bill, meanwhile, claim the grievance committees do not address prosecutorial misconduct in a transparent or effective way. The proposed commission would make its decisions and supporting documents easily available to the public, which the grievance committees do not currently do.
They argue a commission to zone in on prosecutorial misconduct could prevent wrongful convictions and consequently exonerations, of which New York has among the highest number in the country.
Cuomo has not publicly taken a position on the bill. The deadline for him to either sign or veto the legislation is Aug. 20.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCourt System Names New Administrative Judges for New York City Courts in Leadership Shakeup
3 minute readRetired Judge Susan Cacace Elected Westchester DA in Win for Democrats
In Eric Adams Case and Other Corruption Matters, Prosecutors Seem Bent on Pushing Boundaries of Their Already Awesome Power
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Aging Condo Neglect Leads to $1M Payout in Miami Beach Slip and Fall
- 2‘BiT Global Lost’: Federal Judge Won’t Stop Coinbase From Delisting wBTC Token
- 3Some Elite Universities Favor Wealthy Students in Admissions Decisions, Lawsuit Alleges
- 4Judge Asks: Should Tom Girardi Serve Sentence in a Medical Facility or Behind Bars?
- 5EPA grants California authority to ban sales of new gas cars by 2035. Action faces reversal by Trump
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250