People v. Pelaez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Pelaez

186 A.D.2d 465, 589 N.Y.S.2d 774, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12166

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

DecidedOctober 22, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 186 A.D.2d 465 (People v. Pelaez) 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. Pelaez, 186 A.D.2d 465, 589 N.Y.S.2d 774, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12166 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ira Globerman, J.), rendered June 30, 1989, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree, and sentencing him to 18 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

Trial counsel’s decision not to move for a severance was an effective trial strategy that resulted in the dismissal of three out of five counts, including an acquittal on the top count of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the first degree. There was no irreconcilable conflict between the defenses presented by the codefendants requiring severance under the rationale of People v Mahboubian (74 NY2d 174), nor was defendant unduly prejudiced or his defense discernably compromised by the introduction of evidence relating solely to the codefendant (cf., People v Castro-Restrepo, 169 AD2d 454, lv denied 77 NY2d 993).

It therefore cannot be said upon this record that defendant received "less than meaningful representation” (People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 708). Concur — Carro, J. P., Milonas, Ellerin and Asch, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ira Globerman, J.), rendered June 30, 1989, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree, and sentencing him to 18 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

Trial counsel’s decision not to move for a severance was an effective trial strategy that resulted in the dismissal of three out of five counts, including an acquittal on the top count of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the first degree. There was no irreconcilable conflict between the defenses presented by the codefendants requiring severance under the rationale of People v Mahboubian (74 NY2d 174), nor was defendant unduly prejudiced or his defense discernably compromised by the introduction of evidence relating solely to the codefendant (cf., People v Castro-Restrepo, 169 AD2d 454, lv denied 77 NY2d 993).

It therefore cannot be said upon this record that defendant received "less than meaningful representation” (People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 708). Concur — Carro, J. P., Milonas, Ellerin and Asch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 A.D.2d 465, 589 N.Y.S.2d 774, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12166, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-pelaez-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack