People v. Frost

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Frost

151 A.D.2d 989, 542 N.Y.S.2d 427, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8308

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

DecidedJune 2, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 151 A.D.2d 989 (People v. Frost) 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. Frost, 151 A.D.2d 989, 542 N.Y.S.2d 427, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8308 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant’s primary contention on appeal is that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. In reviewing claims of ineffective counsel, defense counsel’s conduct in its entirety must be considered and care must be taken not to confuse true ineffectiveness with mere losing tactics (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 146-147). From our review of the law, the evidence and the circumstances of this particular case, we conclude that defense counsel provided the defendant with meaningful representation (People v Baldi, supra).

We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contention and find it to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Mark, J. — robbery, second degree, and other charges.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Boomer, Law-ton and Davis, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant’s primary contention on appeal is that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. In reviewing claims of ineffective counsel, defense counsel’s conduct in its entirety must be considered and care must be taken not to confuse true ineffectiveness with mere losing tactics (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 146-147). From our review of the law, the evidence and the circumstances of this particular case, we conclude that defense counsel provided the defendant with meaningful representation (People v Baldi, supra).

We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contention and find it to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Mark, J. — robbery, second degree, and other charges.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Boomer, Law-ton and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

151 A.D.2d 989, 542 N.Y.S.2d 427, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8308, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-frost-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack