People v. DeCapua

193 A.D.2d 1109, 600 N.Y.S.2d 666, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5750
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 28, 1993·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him of 16 counts of sodomy in the third degree and one count of endangering the welfare of a child, defendant argues that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. Based on the totality of the representation provided, we conclude that he received effective assistance of counsel (see generally, People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 708-709). Defendant’s argument concerning the court’s charge is unpreserved and we decline to reach it in the interest of justice. Were we to deem preserved his argument concerning the sufficiency of the notice given when the search and arrest warrants were executed, we would find it lacking in merit. The purpose of the knock and announce requirement, "obviating the need for forcible entry” (People v Riddick, 45 NY2d 300, 314, revd on other grounds sub nom. Payton v New York, 445 US 573), was met here. Defendant’s sentence was neither harsh nor excessive. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Easier, J.—Sodomy, 3rd Degree.) Present—Denman, P. J., Pine, Balio, Fallon and Boehm, JJ.

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

People v. DeCapua, 193 A.D.2d 1109, 600 N.Y.S.2d 666, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5750 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

193 A.D.2d 1109 (People v. DeCapua) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Ward
2019 NY Slip Op 624 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People v. Barnhill
34 A.D.3d 933 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)