LAS Attys/ Offices: Newman (CDP/SLU)
Other Counsel: None
Date Filed: 2008
Class Action: No
Nature of Claims: In this case, the client, acting pro se, persuaded the 2nd Department to grant a coram nobis writ and modify his sentence, on the ground that his appellate attorney was ineffective in failing to argue that consecutive sentences imposed on two counts of the indictment were illegal. However, the Appellate Division, when fashioning a remedy for the illegal sentence, modified a concurrent sentence imposed by the trial court to make it consecutive, thereby leaving the client with the same aggregate sentence as before. We agreed to take the case to argue that the Appellate Division was not legally authorized to modify the sentence in this way and asked for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals. The People opposed the leave application on technical grounds. We have submitted a Reply to the People's technical argument. The application is pending.
Current Status: Application for Leave to Appeal pending