People v. Martinez

259 A.D.2d 981, 688 N.Y.S.2d 360, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3311
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Martinez. Read the opinion of the Court — 237 A.D.2d 217

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject the contention of defendant that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. Upon our review of the evidence, the law, and the circumstances of this case, viewed in totality and as of the time of the representation, we conclude that defendant received meaningful representation (see, People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 708-709; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147). Indeed, three of the four alleged instances of ineffective assistance were caused by defendant’s absence from the trial. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Galloway, J. — Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 1st Degree.) Present — Denman, P. J., Lawton, Hayes, Pigott, Jr., and Scudder, JJ.

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

People v. Martinez, 259 A.D.2d 981, 688 N.Y.S.2d 360, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3311 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

259 A.D.2d 981 (People v. Martinez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Baldi
429 N.E.2d 400 (New York Court of Appeals, 1981)
People v. Rivera
525 N.E.2d 698 (New York Court of Appeals, 1988)