People v. Barrios

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Barrios

186 A.D.2d 370, 588 N.Y.S.2d 549, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11197

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

DecidedOctober 6, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 186 A.D.2d 370 (People v. Barrios) 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. Barrios, 186 A.D.2d 370, 588 N.Y.S.2d 549, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11197 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered on January 22, 1990, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree and sentencing him to four years to life in prison, unanimously affirmed.

We find no basis to set aside defendant’s plea. No motion to suppress evidence was made in Supreme Court and the facts now alleged by defendant, i.e., that he was arrested in the home of his friend without a warrant, present no basis for concluding that counsel’s failure to make such a motion constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. Defendant’s bare allegation that unidentified Brady materials were withheld is insufficient to invoke further inquiry. As defendant pled guilty, he was not entitled to Rosario disclosure. The record reveals that an interpreter was present at defendant’s arraignment. Finally, the record demonstrates that defendant was afforded vigorous and effective representation. Concur— Carro, J. P., Milonas, Rosenberger and Ellerin, JJ.

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

— Judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered on January 22, 1990, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree and sentencing him to four years to life in prison, unanimously affirmed.

We find no basis to set aside defendant’s plea. No motion to suppress evidence was made in Supreme Court and the facts now alleged by defendant, i.e., that he was arrested in the home of his friend without a warrant, present no basis for concluding that counsel’s failure to make such a motion constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. Defendant’s bare allegation that unidentified Brady materials were withheld is insufficient to invoke further inquiry. As defendant pled guilty, he was not entitled to Rosario disclosure. The record reveals that an interpreter was present at defendant’s arraignment. Finally, the record demonstrates that defendant was afforded vigorous and effective representation. Concur— Carro, J. P., Milonas, Rosenberger and Ellerin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 A.D.2d 370, 588 N.Y.S.2d 549, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11197, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-barrios-nyappdiv-1992.