People v. Delessandro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Delessandro

57 A.D.3d 560, 867 N.Y.2d 699

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 2, 2008·Published

Opinion

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the trial court’s charge on recent exclusive possession of stolen property was not improper. Accordingly, the defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim, based solely on the fact that his assigned counsel requested the instruction, is without merit (see generally People v McKenzie, 48 AD3d 594, 595 [2008]; People v Stover, 36 AD3d 837, 838 [2007]).

The sentence imposed was excessive to the extent indicated herein (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Mastro, J.E, Skelos, Balkin and Belen, JJ., concur.

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

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the trial court’s charge on recent exclusive possession of stolen property was not improper. Accordingly, the defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim, based solely on the fact that his assigned counsel requested the instruction, is without merit (see generally People v McKenzie, 48 AD3d 594, 595 [2008]; People v Stover, 36 AD3d 837, 838 [2007]).

The sentence imposed was excessive to the extent indicated herein (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Mastro, J.E, Skelos, Balkin and Belen, JJ., concur.

People v. Delessandro, 57 A.D.3d 560, 867 N.Y.2d 699 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

57 A.D.3d 560 (People v. Delessandro) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related