People v. Bowers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bowers

283 A.D.2d 210, 724 N.Y.S.2d 299, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4823

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

DecidedMay 8, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 283 A.D.2d 210 (People v. Bowers) 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. Bowers, 283 A.D.2d 210, 724 N.Y.S.2d 299, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4823 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Frederick Wetzel, J.), rendered August 27, 1998, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 5V2 to 11 years, and order, same court and Justice, entered on or about April 18, 2000, which denied defendant’s motion made [211]*211pursuant to CPL 440.10 to vacate the judgment, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to reduce the sentence to concurrent terms of 4V2 to 9 years, and otherwise affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning credibility.

Defendant’s motion to vacate judgment, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, was properly denied (see, CPL 440.30 [4] [b], [c], [d]). The motion court properly determined that defendant received meaningful representation (see, People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-714).

We find the sentence excessive to the extent indicated.

We have considered and rejected the claims contained in defendant’s pro se supplemental briefs. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Tom, Andrias and Ellerin, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Frederick Wetzel, J.), rendered August 27, 1998, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 5V2 to 11 years, and order, same court and Justice, entered on or about April 18, 2000, which denied defendant’s motion made [211]*211pursuant to CPL 440.10 to vacate the judgment, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to reduce the sentence to concurrent terms of 4V2 to 9 years, and otherwise affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning credibility.

Defendant’s motion to vacate judgment, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, was properly denied (see, CPL 440.30 [4] [b], [c], [d]). The motion court properly determined that defendant received meaningful representation (see, People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-714).

We find the sentence excessive to the extent indicated.

We have considered and rejected the claims contained in defendant’s pro se supplemental briefs. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Tom, Andrias and Ellerin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 A.D.2d 210, 724 N.Y.S.2d 299, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4823, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bowers-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack