People v. Crespo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Crespo

179 A.D.2d 574, 579 N.Y.S.2d 652, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 845

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

DecidedJanuary 28, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 179 A.D.2d 574 (People v. Crespo) 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. Crespo, 179 A.D.2d 574, 579 N.Y.S.2d 652, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 845 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Defendant argues that he was denied effective assistance of counsel, since his trial attorney did not know that People v Mingo (125 Misc 2d 373) had been reversed by this court (121 AD2d 307), and was unaware of People v Petralia (62 NY2d 47). This lapse does not warrant reversal. The request for production of the undercover officer would not have been successful in any event, and the mere request for such relief, even if the result of ignorance, did not prejudice defendant. It has not been shown that counsel, who properly moved for suppression, did not competently cross-examine the officer, or otherwise effectively represent defendant at the hearing or subsequent plea. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Kupferman, Ross and Kassal, JJ.

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

Defendant argues that he was denied effective assistance of counsel, since his trial attorney did not know that People v Mingo (125 Misc 2d 373) had been reversed by this court (121 AD2d 307), and was unaware of People v Petralia (62 NY2d 47). This lapse does not warrant reversal. The request for production of the undercover officer would not have been successful in any event, and the mere request for such relief, even if the result of ignorance, did not prejudice defendant. It has not been shown that counsel, who properly moved for suppression, did not competently cross-examine the officer, or otherwise effectively represent defendant at the hearing or subsequent plea. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Kupferman, Ross and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

179 A.D.2d 574, 579 N.Y.S.2d 652, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 845, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-crespo-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack