People v. Bradburn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bradburn

110 A.D.2d 1065, 489 N.Y.S.2d 26, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48943

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

DecidedApril 5, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 110 A.D.2d 1065 (People v. Bradburn) 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. Bradburn, 110 A.D.2d 1065, 489 N.Y.S.2d 26, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48943 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

Absent a request by defendant that assault in the third degree under Penal Law § 120.00 (3) be charged as a lesser included offense, the court’s failure to submit such charge was not error [1066]*1066(CPL 300.50 [2]; People v Roberts, 91 AD2d 1099, 1100). Nor may it be said, given the nature of the argument for acquittal made to the jury by counsel, that the absence of a request for such charge amounted to ineffective assistance of counsel (see, People v Jackson, 52 NY2d 1027, 1029).

Defendant concedes that the People announced their readiness for trial on the record five months and 19 days after defendant’s arrest. Since no argument is made that they were not in fact then ready to proceed, defendant was not denied his right to a speedy trial under CPL 30.30 (see, People v Kendzia, 64 NY2d 331).

Finally, we do not view defendant’s sentence as harsh or excessive. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Reed, J. — assault, second degree.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Boomer, Green, O’Donnell and Schnepp, JJ.

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

Absent a request by defendant that assault in the third degree under Penal Law § 120.00 (3) be charged as a lesser included offense, the court’s failure to submit such charge was not error [1066]*1066(CPL 300.50 [2]; People v Roberts, 91 AD2d 1099, 1100). Nor may it be said, given the nature of the argument for acquittal made to the jury by counsel, that the absence of a request for such charge amounted to ineffective assistance of counsel (see, People v Jackson, 52 NY2d 1027, 1029).

Defendant concedes that the People announced their readiness for trial on the record five months and 19 days after defendant’s arrest. Since no argument is made that they were not in fact then ready to proceed, defendant was not denied his right to a speedy trial under CPL 30.30 (see, People v Kendzia, 64 NY2d 331).

Finally, we do not view defendant’s sentence as harsh or excessive. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Reed, J. — assault, second degree.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Boomer, Green, O’Donnell and Schnepp, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

110 A.D.2d 1065, 489 N.Y.S.2d 26, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48943, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bradburn-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack