People v. Sowells

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sowells

18 A.D.3d 333, 794 N.Y.S.2d 648, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5451

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

DecidedMay 19, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 18 A.D.3d 333 (People v. Sowells) 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. Sowells, 18 A.D.3d 333, 794 N.Y.S.2d 648, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5451 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lawrence H. Bernstein, J.), rendered May 12, 2003, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of seven years, unanimously affirmed.

The ineffective assistance of counsel claims raised in defendant’s pro se supplemental brief are not reviewable on direct appeal since they involve matters outside the record. To the extent the record permits review, it establishes that defendant received effective assistance at all stages of the proceedings (see People v Wiggins, 89 NY2d 872 [1996]; People v Ford, 86 NY2d 397, 404 [1995]; see also Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668 [1984]). We note that at the time of his guilty plea, defendant expressly waived the issue he had previously raised concerning his right to testify before the grand jury.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Saxe, J.P., Marlow, Sullivan, Williams and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lawrence H. Bernstein, J.), rendered May 12, 2003, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of seven years, unanimously affirmed.

The ineffective assistance of counsel claims raised in defendant’s pro se supplemental brief are not reviewable on direct appeal since they involve matters outside the record. To the extent the record permits review, it establishes that defendant received effective assistance at all stages of the proceedings (see People v Wiggins, 89 NY2d 872 [1996]; People v Ford, 86 NY2d 397, 404 [1995]; see also Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668 [1984]). We note that at the time of his guilty plea, defendant expressly waived the issue he had previously raised concerning his right to testify before the grand jury.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Saxe, J.P., Marlow, Sullivan, Williams and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 A.D.3d 333, 794 N.Y.S.2d 648, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5451, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sowells-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack