By JIMMY LAWTON

The state Senate and Assembly are expected to vote today on controversial law that would establish a committee to oversee and investigate alleged prosecutorial misconduct.

The bill is being pushed by Deputy Senate Majority Leader John Defrancisco R-Syracuse who says the committee would serve as a check on power for district attorney’s who he says wield significant power without strong oversight.

Defrancisco has cited ongoing problems in St. Lawrence County as well as wrongful prosecutions as major reasons why District Attorney need additional oversight.

“St. Lawrence County is just a recent example of why this bill is needed. It’s reprehensible that a law student without a license was able to bring a felony case to the court,” he said.

The bill also has plenty of critics. Namely prosecutors who say that while the bill may be well intentioned, unattended consequences could hinder prosecution of criminals. In an opinion piece Rockland County District Attorney Thomas Zugibe, who serves as president of the District Attorney Association of the State of New York, explained the argument against the bill.

“Presumably, this legislation is a well-intentioned attempt to root out bad actors that abuse the powers of their office to obtain criminal convictions. However, the unintended consequences of the commission becoming law are so destructive that it has the potential to upend the criminal justice system,” he wrote.

“If you think that sounds a bit overblown, it isn’t. The proposed law prescribes no specific conditions for a complaint before the Commission on Prosecutorial Conduct, and establishes no burden of proof for complainants. There isn’t even a requirement for allegations to be sworn under oath. That means anyone, regardless of standing, could file a complaint against any prosecutor for virtually any reason, no matter how baseless and unfounded, with no consequences should the complaint be disproven.”

Defrancisco though says the legislation mirrors a similar oversight committee system implemented in the 70s to investigate allegations against judges. He says the legislation was strongly opposed at the time but is accepted practice these days.

“They established the opportunity for an independent body to report complaints for judicial conduct. When that came in years and years ago it was like the world was going to end,” he said. “But it was passed and now nobody blinks an eye at it and it works.”

DeFrancisco said in many cases judges who are investigated are exonerated, sometimes action is taken or they are removed, but he says the process works well and at a reasonable pace.

He says a similar commission could help expedite investigations regarding complaints made against prosecutors.

“Prosecutors have extremely broad powers. They decide what cases are going to trial and what ones aren’t. If there is wrongdoing or a question of wrongdoing, the only remedy now is they don’t get reelected,” he said adding that election cycles can take years.”

But Zugibe disagrees. In his opinion piece he states that there do already exist agencies that oversee prosecutors that have the power to disbar attorneys. He says further oversight is not only unnecessary, but poses a threat to justice.

“For good reason, district attorneys across the state are unanimous in their opposition to the proposed Commission on Prosecutorial Conduct. While its aims are laudatory, creating yet another layer of review is unnecessary. Moreover, it will impede the efficient administration of justice and adversely affect public safety by subjecting already busy prosecutors to investigations and hearings at the whim of a disgruntled defendant, victim, or other member of the public.”

Action on the legislation is expected today in Albany.