People v. Paniagua

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Paniagua

17 A.D.3d 123, 791 N.Y.S.2d 821, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3456

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

DecidedApril 5, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 17 A.D.3d 123 (People v. Paniagua) 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. Paniagua, 17 A.D.3d 123, 791 N.Y.S.2d 821, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3456 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme [124]*124Court, New York County (Charles J. Tejada, J.), rendered October 15, 2002, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the first and second degrees and two counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 15 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s motion for reassignment of counsel. Defendant did not seek to elaborate on the conclusory allegations contained in his standard form motion, and his moving papers did not contain any serious complaint about counsel requiring an inquiry by the court (see People v Sides, 75 NY2d 822 [1990]).

Defendant’s remaining argument is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Marlow, Gonzalez and Sweeny, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme [124]*124Court, New York County (Charles J. Tejada, J.), rendered October 15, 2002, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the first and second degrees and two counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 15 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s motion for reassignment of counsel. Defendant did not seek to elaborate on the conclusory allegations contained in his standard form motion, and his moving papers did not contain any serious complaint about counsel requiring an inquiry by the court (see People v Sides, 75 NY2d 822 [1990]).

Defendant’s remaining argument is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Marlow, Gonzalez and Sweeny, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 A.D.3d 123, 791 N.Y.S.2d 821, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3456, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-paniagua-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack