People v. Maldonado

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Maldonado

247 A.D.2d 555, 668 N.Y.S.2d 916, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1455

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

DecidedFebruary 17, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 247 A.D.2d 555 (People v. Maldonado) 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. Maldonado, 247 A.D.2d 555, 668 N.Y.S.2d 916, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1455 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gary, J.), rendered August 4, 1995, convicting him of [556]*556murder in the second degree and assault in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

There is no merit to the defendant’s claim that his trial attorney’s decision not to call as defense witnesses two accomplices who had already pleaded guilty to the crime with which the defendant was also charged constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. The accomplices had identified the defendant as an armed participant in the shootings and had agreed, if called upon, to testify as prosecution witnesses. Based on the totality of the circumstances, it is clear that the attorney provided meaningful representation (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137; People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 708).

Miller, J. P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gary, J.), rendered August 4, 1995, convicting him of [556]*556murder in the second degree and assault in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

There is no merit to the defendant’s claim that his trial attorney’s decision not to call as defense witnesses two accomplices who had already pleaded guilty to the crime with which the defendant was also charged constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. The accomplices had identified the defendant as an armed participant in the shootings and had agreed, if called upon, to testify as prosecution witnesses. Based on the totality of the circumstances, it is clear that the attorney provided meaningful representation (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137; People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 708).

Miller, J. P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

247 A.D.2d 555, 668 N.Y.S.2d 916, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1455, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-maldonado-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack