People v. Candelario

307 A.D.2d 771, 762 N.Y.S.2d 856, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7935
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 3, 2003·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of Ontario County Court (Harvey, J.), entered November 24, 1999, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of, inter alia, burglary in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: We reject the contention of defendant that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. Defendant received “an advantageous plea and nothing in the record casts doubt [772] on the apparent effectiveness of counsel,” and thus we conclude that he received meaningful representation (People v Ford, 86 NY2d 397, 404 [1995]). The bargained-for sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present — Green, J.P., Wisner, Burns, Gorski and Hayes, JJ.

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

People v. Candelario, 307 A.D.2d 771, 762 N.Y.S.2d 856, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7935 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

307 A.D.2d 771 (People v. Candelario) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Reid
2004 NY Slip Op 50306(U) (New York Supreme Court, Monroe County, 2004)