People v. Barrino

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Barrino

201 A.D.2d 278, 608 N.Y.S.2d 830, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 889

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

DecidedFebruary 3, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 201 A.D.2d 278 (People v. Barrino) 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. Barrino, 201 A.D.2d 278, 608 N.Y.S.2d 830, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 889 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Alvin Schlesinger, J.), rendered June 2, 1992, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to two terms of 4 Vi to 9 years and 3 to 6 years, respectively, the sentences to run concurrently, unanimously affirmed.

The sentencing court properly rejected defendant’s constitutional challenge to a prior felony conviction, even if the court may have relied too heavily on a purported affirmance of that conviction, the grounds of which were not specified (compare, People v Nalo, 91 AD2d 957, with People v Di Giacomo, 96 AD2d 1127). A defendant is required to "allege and prove the facts underlying the claim that the conviction was unconstitutionally obtained (CPL 400.21, subd 7, par [b])” (People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9, 15). Defendant failed to establish that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at the time of his prior guilty plea, and he never requested time to prepare a proper challenge. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Rosenberger, Wallach, Asch and Williams, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Alvin Schlesinger, J.), rendered June 2, 1992, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to two terms of 4 Vi to 9 years and 3 to 6 years, respectively, the sentences to run concurrently, unanimously affirmed.

The sentencing court properly rejected defendant’s constitutional challenge to a prior felony conviction, even if the court may have relied too heavily on a purported affirmance of that conviction, the grounds of which were not specified (compare, People v Nalo, 91 AD2d 957, with People v Di Giacomo, 96 AD2d 1127). A defendant is required to "allege and prove the facts underlying the claim that the conviction was unconstitutionally obtained (CPL 400.21, subd 7, par [b])” (People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9, 15). Defendant failed to establish that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at the time of his prior guilty plea, and he never requested time to prepare a proper challenge. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Rosenberger, Wallach, Asch and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

201 A.D.2d 278, 608 N.Y.S.2d 830, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 889, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-barrino-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack