People v. Hiett

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hiett

22 A.D.3d 296, 801 N.Y.S.2d 736

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

DecidedOctober 11, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 22 A.D.3d 296 (People v. Hiett) 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. Hiett, 22 A.D.3d 296, 801 N.Y.S.2d 736 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald A. Zweibel, J.), rendered April 2, 2002, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 7 to 14 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Both issues of credibility and the weight to be given to asserted inconsistencies in testimony were matters for the jury’s consideration and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]).

On the existing record, 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]), in that counsel made reasonably diligent efforts to produce these uncooperative witnesses. Defendant’s related claim that counsel should have offered certain plea minutes as evidence is meritless.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Tom, J.P., Marlow, Ellerin, Williams and McGuire, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald A. Zweibel, J.), rendered April 2, 2002, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 7 to 14 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Both issues of credibility and the weight to be given to asserted inconsistencies in testimony were matters for the jury’s consideration and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]).

On the existing record, 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]), in that counsel made reasonably diligent efforts to produce these uncooperative witnesses. Defendant’s related claim that counsel should have offered certain plea minutes as evidence is meritless.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Tom, J.P., Marlow, Ellerin, Williams and McGuire, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 A.D.3d 296, 801 N.Y.S.2d 736, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hiett-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack