People v. Monroe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Monroe

206 A.D.2d 563, 615 N.Y.S.2d 1010, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7197

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

DecidedJuly 7, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 206 A.D.2d 563 (People v. Monroe) 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. Monroe, 206 A.D.2d 563, 615 N.Y.S.2d 1010, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7197 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Vogt, J.), rendered February 26, 1992, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of burglary in the second degree.

We are unconvinced by defendant’s claim that the failure of defense counsel to make a pretrial motion to suppress identification testimony constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel under the particular circumstances of this case. The People’s proof in this case was very strong and, in light of defendant’s lengthy criminal history, defense counsel negotiated an advantageous plea bargain. As for defendant’s assertion that his sentence of 4 to 8 years in prison is unduly harsh or excessive, we note that defendant did not receive the harshest sentence available for a second felony offender. Under the circumstances, we find no basis to disturb County Court’s disposition.

Cardona, P. J., White, Weiss, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Vogt, J.), rendered February 26, 1992, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of burglary in the second degree.

We are unconvinced by defendant’s claim that the failure of defense counsel to make a pretrial motion to suppress identification testimony constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel under the particular circumstances of this case. The People’s proof in this case was very strong and, in light of defendant’s lengthy criminal history, defense counsel negotiated an advantageous plea bargain. As for defendant’s assertion that his sentence of 4 to 8 years in prison is unduly harsh or excessive, we note that defendant did not receive the harshest sentence available for a second felony offender. Under the circumstances, we find no basis to disturb County Court’s disposition.

Cardona, P. J., White, Weiss, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

206 A.D.2d 563, 615 N.Y.S.2d 1010, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7197, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-monroe-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack