People v. Castro

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Castro

383 N.E.2d 1154, 45 N.Y.2d 934, 411 N.Y.S.2d 561, 1978 N.Y. LEXIS 2327

DecidedOctober 31, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 383 N.E.2d 1154 (People v. Castro) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Castro, 383 N.E.2d 1154, 45 N.Y.2d 934, 411 N.Y.S.2d 561, 1978 N.Y. LEXIS 2327 (N.Y. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Order of the Appellate Division affirmed. Because of the structural simplicity of the case, it was tried by counsel for both sides without the usual elaboration. Nevertheless, the only real issue was one of identity, and that turns on credibility of the witnesses — the victim, the defendant, and, on the posttrial hearing, the owner of the driving school where, according to the victim, defendant had been employed. The record on the main trial fully supports the Trial Judge’s findings. Moreover, the testimony upon the posttrial hearing, held at defendant’s request, failed to undermine the victim’s testimony concerning defendant’s employment. Being legally sufficient and having been affirmed, the findings are beyond review in this court.

Despite defense trial counsel’s protestations of his blunders, their effect, if blunders they were, was nullified by the post-trial hearing and the opportunity to produce any additional witnesses. Overall, there was no inadequacy of counsel to [936]*936merit overturning the determination made (cf. People v Droz, 39 NY2d 457, 462-463).

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Order of the Appellate Division affirmed. Because of the structural simplicity of the case, it was tried by counsel for both sides without the usual elaboration. Nevertheless, the only real issue was one of identity, and that turns on credibility of the witnesses — the victim, the defendant, and, on the posttrial hearing, the owner of the driving school where, according to the victim, defendant had been employed. The record on the main trial fully supports the Trial Judge’s findings. Moreover, the testimony upon the posttrial hearing, held at defendant’s request, failed to undermine the victim’s testimony concerning defendant’s employment. Being legally sufficient and having been affirmed, the findings are beyond review in this court.

Despite defense trial counsel’s protestations of his blunders, their effect, if blunders they were, was nullified by the post-trial hearing and the opportunity to produce any additional witnesses. Overall, there was no inadequacy of counsel to [936]*936merit overturning the determination made (cf. People v Droz, 39 NY2d 457, 462-463).

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

383 N.E.2d 1154, 45 N.Y.2d 934, 411 N.Y.S.2d 561, 1978 N.Y. LEXIS 2327, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-castro-ny-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack