People v. Doyle

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Doyle

242 A.D.2d 491, 662 N.Y.S.2d 311, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9101

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 25, 1997·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Daniel FitzGerald, J., at hearing; Bernard Fried, J., at jury trial and sentence), rendered March 7, 1995, convicting defendant of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 5 to 10 years, unanimously affirmed.

In light of the information transmitted by the undercover officer, who made a drug purchase, to the arresting officer, which transmission included a detailed description of the perpetrators of the sale, there was probable cause for the arrest (People v Petralia, 62 NY2d 47, 51-52, cert denied 469 US 852).

Defendant’s disagreement with his attorney over trial strategy was not good cause for substitution of counsel and does not establish ineffective assistance of counsel (see, People v Sides, 75 NY2d 822, 824; People v Smith, 59 NY2d 156, 165-166; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Williams, Tom and Colabella, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Daniel FitzGerald, J., at hearing; Bernard Fried, J., at jury trial and sentence), rendered March 7, 1995, convicting defendant of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 5 to 10 years, unanimously affirmed.

In light of the information transmitted by the undercover officer, who made a drug purchase, to the arresting officer, which transmission included a detailed description of the perpetrators of the sale, there was probable cause for the arrest (People v Petralia, 62 NY2d 47, 51-52, cert denied 469 US 852).

Defendant’s disagreement with his attorney over trial strategy was not good cause for substitution of counsel and does not establish ineffective assistance of counsel (see, People v Sides, 75 NY2d 822, 824; People v Smith, 59 NY2d 156, 165-166; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Williams, Tom and Colabella, JJ.

People v. Doyle, 242 A.D.2d 491, 662 N.Y.S.2d 311, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9101 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

242 A.D.2d 491 (People v. Doyle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related