The justices of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Tuesday questioned prosecutors’ interpretation of the conflict-of-interest statute, tangling with the “frightening” effect former state Rep. Michael Veon’s conviction could have on public officials around the state.
Attorney Joel Sansone, arguing on behalf of Veon, said that not only was the conflict statute inappropriately applied to his client, but that it would open a door that could complicate elected officials’ efforts on behalf of their constituents.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
