People v. Santiago

266 A.D.2d 846, 698 N.Y.S.2d 183, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11796
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 12, 1999·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: County Court properly denied defendant’s request for a missing witness charge. The request, made after the close of the proof, was untimely (see, People v Bender, 244 AD2d 910, 910-911, lv denied 91 NY2d 923; People v Castro-Garcia, 203 AD2d 899, lv denied 83 NY2d 965). We reject the contention that defendant was denied effec[847]*847tive assistance of counsel at trial. “[T]he evidence, the law, and the circumstances of [this] case, viewed in totality and as of the time of the representation, reveal that the attorney provided meaningful representation” (People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147). (Appeal from Judgment of Erie County Court, Drury, J. — Burglary, 2nd Degree.) Present — Green, J. P., Lawton, Hayes, Hurlbutt and Balio, JJ.

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

People v. Santiago, 266 A.D.2d 846, 698 N.Y.S.2d 183, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11796 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

266 A.D.2d 846 (People v. Santiago) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Garrido-Valdez
299 A.D.2d 858 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
People v. Richards
275 A.D.2d 886 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)