¶1Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant pleaded guilty to criminal possession of marihuana in the first degree. On appeal, defendant contends that he was denied effective assistance of counsel because of a conflict of interest. The conduct of the defense was not affected by a conflict of interest created by defense counsel’s concurrent representation of a prosecution witness on an unrelated civil matter (see, People v Ortiz, 76 NY2d 652; People v Wandell, 75 NY2d 951; People v Alicea, 61 NY2d 23). The record discloses that, prior to the commencement of the hearing, the prosecutor and defense counsel advised the court of the conflict. Thereafter, the court engaged defendant in a Gomberg inquiry (see, People v Gomberg, 38 NY2d 307), advised defendant of the potential risks and asked whether
187 A.D.2d 930
People v. Miller
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided November 18, 1992
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · decided 1992-11-18
Decided 1992-11-18