People v. Accove

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Accove

264 A.D.2d 643, 696 N.Y.S.2d 402, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9292

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedSeptember 23, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 264 A.D.2d 643 (People v. Accove) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Accove, 264 A.D.2d 643, 696 N.Y.S.2d 402, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9292 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (George Covington, J.), rendered on or about April 28, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 7V2 to 15 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim would require a CPL 440.10 motion in order to develop the record as to matters of strategy and the availability of a potential medical expert witness. On the existing record, we find that defendant received meaningful representation (see, People v Ben[644]*644evento, 91 NY2d 708; People v Hall, 168 AD2d 310, 311, lv denied 77 NY2d 906).

We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining claims. Concur — Rubin, J. P., Andrias, Saxe, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (George Covington, J.), rendered on or about April 28, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 7V2 to 15 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim would require a CPL 440.10 motion in order to develop the record as to matters of strategy and the availability of a potential medical expert witness. On the existing record, we find that defendant received meaningful representation (see, People v Ben[644]*644evento, 91 NY2d 708; People v Hall, 168 AD2d 310, 311, lv denied 77 NY2d 906).

We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining claims. Concur — Rubin, J. P., Andrias, Saxe, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

264 A.D.2d 643, 696 N.Y.S.2d 402, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9292, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-accove-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack