People v. Perry

148 A.D.3d 1224, 48 N.Y.S.3d 548
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 2, 2017·Published·Cited by 13 cases

Opinion

Clark, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Hayden, J.), rendered June 23, 2014, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree and falsely reporting an incident in the third degree.

On June 23, 2013, defendant was arrested for falsely reporting an incident and, during a search incident to his arrest, was found to be in possession of cocaine. Defendant was thereafter indicted on charges of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree and falsely reporting an incident in the third degree. Following a jury trial, at which defendant testified, defendant was found guilty as charged and sentenced to an aggregate prison term of three years. Defendant now appeals, solely arguing that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel.

A defendant’s right to the effective assistance of counsel is guaranteed by both the US and NY Constitutions (see US Const 6th Amend; NY Const, art I, § 6). To succeed on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel under the US Constitution, a defendant must demonstrate that the performance of his or her trial counsel “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness . . . under prevailing professional norms” and that there is a “reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different” (Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668, 688, 694 [1984]; see People v Harris, 26 NY3d 321, 328 [2015]; People v Hernandez, 22 NY3d 972, 974-975 [2013], cert denied 572 US —, 134 S Ct 1900 [2014]). By comparison, to prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel under the NY Constitution, a defendant must establish that he or she was not provided meaningful representation and that there is an “absence of strategic or other legitimate explanations” for counsel’s allegedly deficient performance (People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 709 [1988]; see People v Caban, 5 NY3d 143, 152 [2005]; People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 712 [1998]). If “the defense reflects a reasonable and legitimate strategy under the circumstances and evidence presented, even if unsuccessful, it will not fall to [1225]*1225the level of ineffective assistance” (People v Benevento, 91 NY2d at 712-713; see People v Berroa, 99 NY2d 134, 138 [2002]).

Here, with respect to the charge of falsely reporting an incident, the People sought to prove that defendant, while acting in concert with another person, gratuitously reported to the arresting police officer that he had been a passenger in a vehicle driven by his purported accomplice and that the vehicle had been struck in a hit-and-run accident. To that end, the People relied, in large part, on hearsay statements made by defendant’s purported accomplice to the arresting officer. While defendant did not challenge the admissibility of these hearsay statements, as one might expect, it appears that his defense strategy was to attribute the false report solely to his purported accomplice and to deny that he participated or aided in any way. Defense counsel’s opening and closing statements, as well as his questions during cross-examinations and direct examinations, furthered this apparent strategy. As to defendant’s defense of the possession charge, made more difficult by the drugs having been found on his person, defendant appeared to have employed a strategy of contesting the credibility of the arresting officer so as to create reasonable doubt (see People v Johnson, 303 AD2d 830, 835 [2003], lvs denied 99 NY2d 655 [2003], 100 NY2d 583 [2003]). However, defendant took the stand

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

People v. Perry, 148 A.D.3d 1224, 48 N.Y.S.3d 548 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

148 A.D.3d 1224 (People v. Perry) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Johnson
2024 NY Slip Op 01212 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)
People v. Cole
2023 NY Slip Op 03376 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
People v. Stratton
159 N.Y.S.3d 763 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Green
2021 NY Slip Op 00207 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
People v. Banks
2020 NY Slip Op 1525 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People v. Cayea
2018 NY Slip Op 5372 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
People v. Young
2018 NY Slip Op 2673 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
People v. Crippen
2017 NY Slip Op 8552 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
People v. Place
2017 NY Slip Op 5767 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
People v. Byrd
2017 NY Slip Op 5769 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
People v. Wolf
2017 NY Slip Op 5271 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)