People v. Moye

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Moye

215 A.D.2d 595, 627 N.Y.S.2d 935, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5113

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

DecidedMay 15, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 215 A.D.2d 595 (People v. Moye) 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. Moye, 215 A.D.2d 595, 627 N.Y.S.2d 935, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5113 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Egitto, J.), rendered November 13, 1992, convicting her of manslaughter in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

While the defendant contends that counsel failed to inform her of her right to testify at trial over his objection, the record does not contain sufficient information to review this contention, which should be raised in a postjudgment motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 (People v Smith, 112 AD2d 389). Accordingly, we cannot conclude from the present record whether the defendant was denied the effective assistance of counsel.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]) or without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Santucci and Krausman, 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 (Egitto, J.), rendered November 13, 1992, convicting her of manslaughter in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

While the defendant contends that counsel failed to inform her of her right to testify at trial over his objection, the record does not contain sufficient information to review this contention, which should be raised in a postjudgment motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 (People v Smith, 112 AD2d 389). Accordingly, we cannot conclude from the present record whether the defendant was denied the effective assistance of counsel.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]) or without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Santucci and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 A.D.2d 595, 627 N.Y.S.2d 935, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5113, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-moye-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack