People v. Mondera

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mondera

121 A.D.2d 569, 503 N.Y.S.2d 617, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 58555

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

DecidedJune 16, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 121 A.D.2d 569 (People v. Mondera) 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. Mondera, 121 A.D.2d 569, 503 N.Y.S.2d 617, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 58555 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kay, J.), rendered October 8, 1982, convicting him of rape in the first degree, sodomy in the first degree (two counts), sexual abuse in the first degree (two counts), robbery in the first degree and coercion in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

After reviewing the record, we find that the defendant was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel. Defense counsel was reasonably competent and provided meaningful representation to the defendant (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 146-147; People v Satterfield, 66 NY2d 796, 798-799; People v Morris, 100 AD2d 630, affd 64 NY2d 803). In addition, we decline to invoke our discretion to modify the sentence imposed by the trial court (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). The trial court’s imposition of a consecutive sentence with respect to the conviction for coercion in the first degree was not improper as the material elements of that crime are not material elements of the crimes of rape, robbery and sexual abuse (see, Penal Law § 70.25 [2]; People v Brathwaite, 63 NY2d 839; cf. People v Derhi, 110 AD2d 709; People v Dorsey, 79 AD2d 611). Weinstein, J. P., Niehoff, Kunzeman and Spatt, 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 (Kay, J.), rendered October 8, 1982, convicting him of rape in the first degree, sodomy in the first degree (two counts), sexual abuse in the first degree (two counts), robbery in the first degree and coercion in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

After reviewing the record, we find that the defendant was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel. Defense counsel was reasonably competent and provided meaningful representation to the defendant (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 146-147; People v Satterfield, 66 NY2d 796, 798-799; People v Morris, 100 AD2d 630, affd 64 NY2d 803). In addition, we decline to invoke our discretion to modify the sentence imposed by the trial court (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). The trial court’s imposition of a consecutive sentence with respect to the conviction for coercion in the first degree was not improper as the material elements of that crime are not material elements of the crimes of rape, robbery and sexual abuse (see, Penal Law § 70.25 [2]; People v Brathwaite, 63 NY2d 839; cf. People v Derhi, 110 AD2d 709; People v Dorsey, 79 AD2d 611). Weinstein, J. P., Niehoff, Kunzeman and Spatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

121 A.D.2d 569, 503 N.Y.S.2d 617, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 58555, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mondera-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack