| People v Flores, Alex |
| Motion No: 2010-07773 |
| Slip Opinion No: 2011 NY Slip Op 84177(U) |
| Decided on September 20, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department, Motion Decision |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This motion is uncorrected and is not subject to publication in the Official Reports. |
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M125900
E/sl
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS
L. PRISCILLA HALL
PLUMMER E. LOTT, JJ.
|
2010-07773, 2010-08439, 2010-08768, 2010-08771 The People, etc., respondent, v Alex Flores, appellant. (Appeal No. 1) The People, etc., respondent, v Lucio Ramirez, appellant. (Appeal No. 2) The People, etc., respondent, v Benigno Aguilar, appellant. (Appeal No. 3) The People, etc., respondent, v Emmanuel Flores, appellant. (Appeal No. 4) (Ind. No. 09-00605)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the appellants on appeals from four judgments of the County Court, Orange County, rendered August 6, 2010, August 9, 2010, and August 31, 2010 (two judgments), respectively, to extend their time to comply with a decision and order on motion of this Court dated July 26, 2011, requiring them to file notarized affidavits by a date certain.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is granted, and on or before September 23, 2011, each appellant shall file with the Clerk of this Court a separate duly notarized affidavit setting forth the following information:
That he and his co-appellants have retained Leonard J. Levenson to represent them on appeal; that the appellant has discussed with Mr. Levenson the possibility that a conflict of interest could arise in connection with his joint representation; that the appellant is satisfied at this point that no conflict exists; that if a conflict arises the appellant would have the right to retain separate counsel; and that he understands that if Mr. Levenson continues to represent him and his co-appellants and his appeal is determined based on that joint representation, he could waive any claim that the dual representation constituted a conflict of interest.
RIVERA, J.P., CHAMBERS, HALL and LOTT, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Matthew G. Kiernan
Clerk of the Court