People v. Emanilov (Richard)

• Court: Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
• Decided: December 18, 2017
• Docket: 2017 NYSlipOp 51701(U)
• Status: Published

Opinion

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Richard Emanilov, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Joanne B. Watters, J.), rendered June 6, 2017, convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of trespass, and imposing sentence.

Per Curiam.

Judgment of conviction (Joanne B. Watters, J.), rendered June 6, 2017, affirmed.

Defendant's pro se ineffective assistance of counsel claims are unreviewable on direct appeal because they involve matters not reflected in, or fully explained by, the record (see People v Archer, 137 AD3d 449, 449 [2016], lv denied 27 NY3d 1128 [2016], citing People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 709 [1988]; People v Rosado, 28 AD3d 215, 216 [2006]; People v White, 27 AD3d 387, 388 [2006], lv denied 6 NY3d 899 [2006]), particularly the substance of communications between defendant and his attorney (see People v Denny, 95 NY2d 921, 923 [2000]). Accordingly, since defendant has not made a CPL 440.10 motion, the merits of the ineffectiveness claims may not be addressed on appeal. To the extent that the existing record permits review, defendant received effective assistance under the state and federal standards (see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-714 [1998]; see also Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668 [1984]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concurI concurI concur
Decision Date: December 18, 2017