People v. Shegog

23 A.D.3d 1158, 807 N.Y.S.2d 764
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 10, 2005·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Motion for writ of error coram nobis granted. Memorandum: Defendant contends that he was denied effective assistance of appellate counsel because counsel failed to raise an issue on direct appeal that would have resulted in reversal, specifically, that trial counsel took an adverse position to defendant’s pro se CPL 330.30 motion. Upon our review of the trial court proceedings, we conclude that the issue may have merit. Therefore, the order of November 15, 1989 is vacated and this Court will consider the appeal de novo (see People v Vasquez, 70 NY2d 1 [1987], rearg denied 70 NY2d 748 [1987]; [1159]*1159People v LeFrois, 151 AD2d 1046 [1989]). Defendant is directed to file and serve his records and briefs with this Court on or before January 9, 2006. Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Hurlbutt, Kehoe, Pine and Lawton, JJ.

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

People v. Shegog, 23 A.D.3d 1158, 807 N.Y.S.2d 764 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

23 A.D.3d 1158 (People v. Shegog) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Shegog
32 A.D.3d 1289 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)