People v. Page

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Page

134 A.D.3d 858, 19 N.Y.S.3d 905

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

DecidedDecember 9, 2015

Docket2013-08286

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 134 A.D.3d 858 (People v. Page) 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. Page, 134 A.D.3d 858, 19 N.Y.S.3d 905 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Zambelli, J.), rendered July 30, 2013, convicting him of assault 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.

The defendant’s contention that certain comments made by the prosecutor on summation deprived him of a fair trial is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Adams, 93 AD3d 734 [2012]). In any event, the challenged comments were either fair comment upon the evidence or reasonable inferences which could be drawn therefrom (see People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105, 109 [1976]; People v Smith, 48 AD3d 298, 300 [2008]; People v Almonte, 23 AD3d 392, 394 [2005]). In addition, since the challenged remarks were not improper, defense counsel’s failure to object to those comments did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel (see People v McGowan, 111 AD3d 850, 851 [2013]; People v Friel, 53 AD3d 667, 668 [2008]).

Furthermore, the defendant’s contention that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel due to trial counsel’s failure to object to several alleged hearsay statements also is without merit. Trial counsel provided the defendant with meaningful representation (see People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]; People v Pham, 118 AD3d 1159, 1163 [2014]). Dillon, J.P., Chambers, Austin and Sgroi, 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 County Court, Westchester County (Zambelli, J.), rendered July 30, 2013, convicting him of assault 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.

The defendant’s contention that certain comments made by the prosecutor on summation deprived him of a fair trial is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Adams, 93 AD3d 734 [2012]). In any event, the challenged comments were either fair comment upon the evidence or reasonable inferences which could be drawn therefrom (see People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105, 109 [1976]; People v Smith, 48 AD3d 298, 300 [2008]; People v Almonte, 23 AD3d 392, 394 [2005]). In addition, since the challenged remarks were not improper, defense counsel’s failure to object to those comments did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel (see People v McGowan, 111 AD3d 850, 851 [2013]; People v Friel, 53 AD3d 667, 668 [2008]).

Furthermore, the defendant’s contention that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel due to trial counsel’s failure to object to several alleged hearsay statements also is without merit. Trial counsel provided the defendant with meaningful representation (see People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]; People v Pham, 118 AD3d 1159, 1163 [2014]). Dillon, J.P., Chambers, Austin and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

134 A.D.3d 858, 19 N.Y.S.3d 905, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-page-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack