People v. Midlarsky
This text of 172 A.D.2d 631 (People v. Midlarsky) 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.
Opinion
Appeals by the defendant (1) from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Hillery, J.), rendered November 28, 1983, convicting him of murder in the second degree and attempted murder in the second degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence, and (2), by permission, from an order of the same court, entered July 5, 1988, which denied his motion pursuant to CPL 440.10, to vacate the judgment of conviction.
Ordered that the judgment and order are affirmed.
We find no merit to the defendant’s contention that he was [632]*632denied the effective assistance of trial counsel (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137). In addition, the imposition of consecutive sentences was not illegal (see, Penal Law § 70.25 [2]; People v Truesdell, 70 NY2d 809, 811; People v Brathwaite, 63 NY2d 839; People v Chandler, 106 AD2d 677), nor were the sentences excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Finally, the defendant’s motion, pursuant to CPL 440.10, to vacate the judgment of conviction was properly denied for reasons stated by Justice Hillery at the Supreme Court. Lawrence, J. P., Fiber, Balletta and Ritter, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
172 A.D.2d 631, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-midlarsky-nyappdiv-1991.