People v. Bowens

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bowens

146 A.D.2d 641, 538 N.Y.S.2d 455, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 466

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

DecidedJanuary 17, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 146 A.D.2d 641 (People v. Bowens) 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. Bowens, 146 A.D.2d 641, 538 N.Y.S.2d 455, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 466 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Owens, J.), rendered April 17, 1984, convicting him of murder in the second degree and attempted robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that he was denied his constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel. We find that "the evidence, the law, and the circumstances of [this] case, viewed in totality and as of the time of the representation, reveal that the attorney provided meaningful representation” (People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147).

We have considered the defendant’s other contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review as a matter of law (CPL 470.05 [2]) or without merit. Mangano, J. P., Thompson, Kunzeman and Eiber, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Owens, J.), rendered April 17, 1984, convicting him of murder in the second degree and attempted robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that he was denied his constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel. We find that "the evidence, the law, and the circumstances of [this] case, viewed in totality and as of the time of the representation, reveal that the attorney provided meaningful representation” (People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147).

We have considered the defendant’s other contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review as a matter of law (CPL 470.05 [2]) or without merit. Mangano, J. P., Thompson, Kunzeman and Eiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

146 A.D.2d 641, 538 N.Y.S.2d 455, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 466, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bowens-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack