From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Dillon v. Kowtna

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 3, 2000
270 A.D.2d 219 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

March 3, 2000.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to prohibit the respondent Paul E. Kowtna, Judge of the County Court, Nassau County, from enforcing an order dated February 4, 2000, which granted a motion by the respondent Michael Fortin to disqualify Assistant District Attorney Robert Biancavilla from representing the petitioner in a criminal action entitled People v. Fortin under Nassau County Indictment No. 2111N-99.

Denis Dillon, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Robert A. Schwartz and Margaret E. Mainusch of counsel), petitioner pro se.

Thomas F. Liotti, Garden City, N. Y., for respondent Michael Fortin.

Eliot L. Spitzer, Attorney-General, Mineola, N.Y. (Robert K. Drinan of counsel), for respondent Paul E. Kowtna (no papers filed).

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., FRED T. SANTUCCI, SONDRA MILLER, GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, JJ.


DECISION JUDGMENT

ADJUDGED that the petition is granted, without costs or disbursements, and the respondents are prohibited from enforcing the order dated February 4, 2000.

As a general rule, a court should remove a public prosecutor only to protect a defendant from actual prejudice arising from a demonstrated conflict of interest or a substantial risk of an abuse of confidence ( see, Matter of Schumer v. Holtzman, 60 N.Y.2d 46, 55). Here, the defendant in the pending criminal action, the respondent Michael Fortin, failed to offer relevant evidence in admissible form sufficient to substantiate his claim of a conflict of interest and thus, failed to meet his burden of establishing the likelihood of actual prejudice. Accordingly, in granting the motion to disqualify, Judge Kowtna acted in excess of his authority, and the petition must be granted ( see, LaRocca v. Lane, 37 N.Y.2d 575, 578-579, cert denied 424 U.S. 968; Matter of Schumer v. Holtzman, supra, at 51; Matter of Morgenthau v. Altman, 207 A.D.2d 685).

RITTER, J.P., SANTUCCI, S. MILLER, and KRAUSMAN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Dillon v. Kowtna

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 3, 2000
270 A.D.2d 219 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Matter of Dillon v. Kowtna

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF DENIS DILLON, petitioner, v. PAUL E. KOWTNA, etc., et…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Mar 3, 2000

Citations

270 A.D.2d 219 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
704 N.Y.S.2d 511

Citing Cases

In the Matter of P. David Soares v. Herrick

This Court's jurisprudence has answered that question in the negative ( see Matter of Dentes v. Rowley, 285…

In re David Soares

This Court's jurisprudence has answered that question in the negative ( see Matter of Dentes v Rowley, 285…