NACDL - Soares v. State of New York

Soares v. State of New York

Memorandum of Law of the New York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, DKT Liberty Project, The Legal Aid Society, Brooklyn Defender Services, The Bronx Defenders, The Chief Defenders Association of New York, The New York State Defenders Association, Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights, and Discovery for Justice as Amici Curiae in Support of Defendant Carl E. Heastie's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment.

Brief filed: 09/03/2019

Documents

Soares-v-State-of-NewYork-Brief.pdf

Soares v. State of New York

Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Albany; Case No. 906409-18

Argument(s)

The legislature, empowered to regulate state prosecutors, may exercise its policy judgment to hold prosecutors accountable for misconduct or otherwise abrogate traditional immunities. Because existing mechanism fail to hold prosecutors accountable for misconduct, it is unsurprising that the legislature concluded the commission is necessary. That prosecutors rarely face accountability for misconduct is a widespread, long-standing, and well-documented problem. The record in New York is no exception, and prosecutors currently escape any accountability for misconduct. The commission will provide accountability that is currently absent.

Author(s)

Anthony S. Barkow, Jenner & Block LLP, New York, NY; Jessica Ring Amunson and Andrew C. Noll, Jenner & Block LLP, Washington, DC; Joel B. Rudin, NACDL, New York, NY; Richard D. Willstatter, NYSACDL, White Plains, NY.