People v. Kirkman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Kirkman

269 A.D.2d 808, 703 N.Y.S.2d 421, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1709

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 16, 2000·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject the contention of defendant that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. Counsel afforded meaningful representation by negotiating a favorable plea and sentence agreement (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147; People v Polanco [appeal No. 1], 216 AD2d 957, lv denied 86 NY2d 800; People v Saggese, 135 AD2d 669, 670). Further, in response to defendant’s request for a new attorney, County Court made an inquiry sufficient to establish that there was no “good cause for substitution” of counsel (People v Sides, [809] 75 NY2d 822, 824; see, People v Medina, 44 NY2d 199, 207-208; People v Smith, 242 AD2d 908, lv denied 91 NY2d 897). Finally, the sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe (see, People v Perkins, 130 AD2d 521, lv denied 70 NY2d 716). (Appeal from Judgment of Onondaga County Court, Mulroy, J.— Burglary, 1st Degree.) Present — Pine, J. P., Wisner, Hurlbutt, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject the contention of defendant that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. Counsel afforded meaningful representation by negotiating a favorable plea and sentence agreement (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147; People v Polanco [appeal No. 1], 216 AD2d 957, lv denied 86 NY2d 800; People v Saggese, 135 AD2d 669, 670). Further, in response to defendant’s request for a new attorney, County Court made an inquiry sufficient to establish that there was no “good cause for substitution” of counsel (People v Sides, [809] 75 NY2d 822, 824; see, People v Medina, 44 NY2d 199, 207-208; People v Smith, 242 AD2d 908, lv denied 91 NY2d 897). Finally, the sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe (see, People v Perkins, 130 AD2d 521, lv denied 70 NY2d 716). (Appeal from Judgment of Onondaga County Court, Mulroy, J.— Burglary, 1st Degree.) Present — Pine, J. P., Wisner, Hurlbutt, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

People v. Kirkman, 269 A.D.2d 808, 703 N.Y.S.2d 421, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1709 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

269 A.D.2d 808 (People v. Kirkman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related