People v. Illescas

47 A.D.3d 840, 849 N.Y.S.2d 165
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 22, 2008
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 47 A.D.3d 840 (People v. Illescas) 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. Illescas, 47 A.D.3d 840, 849 N.Y.S.2d 165 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

Appeal by the defen dant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Collini, J.), rendered October 31, 2005, convicting him of man[841]*841slaughter in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and sentencing him to a determinate term of 22 years’ imprisonment.

Ordered that the judgment is modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing the sentence to a determinate term of 15 years’ imprisonment; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed.

On the existing record, to the extent that it permits review, we find that the defendant received the effective assistance of counsel (see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-714 [1998]; see also Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668 [1984]). Reasonable strategic concerns would support counsel’s decision not to request submission of a lesser-included offense (see People v Lane, 60 NY2d 748 [1983]). The defendant failed to demonstrate that there were no strategic or other legitimate explanations for counsel’s alleged shortcomings (see People v Taylor, 1 NY3d 174 [2003]; People v Benevento, 91 NY2d at 712), or that he was deprived of meaningful representation (see People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]).

The sentence imposed was excessive to the extent indicated herein.

The defendant’s remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review and we decline to reach it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Skelos, J.P., Santucci, Lifson and Garni, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Class
101 A.D.3d 1041 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
People v. Illescas
87 A.D.3d 699 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
People v. Floyd
85 A.D.3d 1052 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
People v. Colville
79 A.D.3d 189 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
47 A.D.3d 840, 849 N.Y.S.2d 165, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-illescas-nyappdiv-2008.