People v. Sceravino
57 A.D.3d 503, 867 N.Y.2d 696
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 2, 2008·Published·Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the record contains nothing to warrant the conclusion that he was deprived of his constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel, which resulted in his consenting to a level two sex offender designation (see generally People v Carey, 47 AD3d 1079 [2008]; see also People v Costas, 46 AD3d 475 [2007]). Mastro, J.E, Rivera, Fisher and Eng, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
People v. Sceravino, 57 A.D.3d 503, 867 N.Y.2d 696 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).
57 A.D.3d 503 (People v. Sceravino) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
People v. Bowles
89 A.D.3d 171 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
People v. Kinlock
66 A.D.3d 980 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)