People v. Rusch

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rusch

157 A.D.2d 870, 550 N.Y.S.2d 436, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1014

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

DecidedJanuary 29, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 157 A.D.2d 870 (People v. Rusch) 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. Rusch, 157 A.D.2d 870, 550 N.Y.S.2d 436, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1014 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Tisch, J.), rendered July 1, 1986, convicting him of conspiracy in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The record indicates that the defendant was examined by two psychiatrists who determined that he was fit to proceed. Under these circumstances, the defendant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel simply because his attorney moved to confirm this determination without requesting a hearing (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137; People v Aiken, 45 NY2d 394). In addition, nothing in the probation report or the plea colloquy raised an issue as to the fitness of the defendant to enter a plea of guilty on May 29, 1986 (People v Heasley, 133 AD2d 977).

Further, defense counsel’s successful negotiation of an agreement enabling the defendant to enter a plea of guilty to conspiracy in the second degree after having been indicted for murder in the second degree is also a factor in determining the issue of the effective assistance of counsel (see, People v Saggese, 135 AD2d 669; People v Strempack, 134 AD2d 799).

We have examined the defendant’s argument that the sentence imposed was excessive and find it to be without merit (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816; People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Kunzeman and Hooper, 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, Suffolk County (Tisch, J.), rendered July 1, 1986, convicting him of conspiracy in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The record indicates that the defendant was examined by two psychiatrists who determined that he was fit to proceed. Under these circumstances, the defendant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel simply because his attorney moved to confirm this determination without requesting a hearing (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137; People v Aiken, 45 NY2d 394). In addition, nothing in the probation report or the plea colloquy raised an issue as to the fitness of the defendant to enter a plea of guilty on May 29, 1986 (People v Heasley, 133 AD2d 977).

Further, defense counsel’s successful negotiation of an agreement enabling the defendant to enter a plea of guilty to conspiracy in the second degree after having been indicted for murder in the second degree is also a factor in determining the issue of the effective assistance of counsel (see, People v Saggese, 135 AD2d 669; People v Strempack, 134 AD2d 799).

We have examined the defendant’s argument that the sentence imposed was excessive and find it to be without merit (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816; People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Kunzeman and Hooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

157 A.D.2d 870, 550 N.Y.S.2d 436, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1014, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rusch-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack