People v. DaCosta

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. DaCosta

245 A.D.2d 525, 666 N.Y.S.2d 494, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13217

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

DecidedDecember 22, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 245 A.D.2d 525 (People v. DaCosta) 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. DaCosta, 245 A.D.2d 525, 666 N.Y.S.2d 494, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13217 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the de[526]*526fendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Brill, J.), rendered July 5, 1995, convicting him of burglary in the first degree, assault in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and endangering the welfare of a child (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court conducted a proper inquiry as to defense counsel’s claimed conflict of interest (see, People v Gomberg, 38 NY2d 307, 314; People v Hunt, 227 AD2d 568).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Goldstein and Lerner, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the de[526]*526fendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Brill, J.), rendered July 5, 1995, convicting him of burglary in the first degree, assault in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and endangering the welfare of a child (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court conducted a proper inquiry as to defense counsel’s claimed conflict of interest (see, People v Gomberg, 38 NY2d 307, 314; People v Hunt, 227 AD2d 568).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Goldstein and Lerner, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

245 A.D.2d 525, 666 N.Y.S.2d 494, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13217, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-dacosta-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack