People v. Ilori

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ilori

52 A.D.3d 419, 861 N.Y.S.2d 620

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

DecidedJune 26, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 52 A.D.3d 419 (People v. Ilori) 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. Ilori, 52 A.D.3d 419, 861 N.Y.S.2d 620 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene R. Silverman, J.), rendered [420]*420May 21, 2007, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of three counts of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 2V2 to 5 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claims are unreviewable on direct appeal because they primarily involve matters outside the record concerning trial counsel’s investigation, preparation and strategy (see People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 709 [1988]; People v Love, 57 NY2d 998 [1982]). On the existing record, to the extent it permits review, we find that 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]).

Defendant’s challenges to the court’s preliminary jury instructions, and to its overall conduct of the trial, are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we find that neither claim warrants reversal. Concur—Lippman, P.J., Tom, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene R. Silverman, J.), rendered [420]*420May 21, 2007, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of three counts of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 2V2 to 5 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claims are unreviewable on direct appeal because they primarily involve matters outside the record concerning trial counsel’s investigation, preparation and strategy (see People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 709 [1988]; People v Love, 57 NY2d 998 [1982]). On the existing record, to the extent it permits review, we find that 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]).

Defendant’s challenges to the court’s preliminary jury instructions, and to its overall conduct of the trial, are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we find that neither claim warrants reversal. Concur—Lippman, P.J., Tom, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 A.D.3d 419, 861 N.Y.S.2d 620, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ilori-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack