People v. Stanley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Stanley

280 A.D.2d 332, 719 N.Y.S.2d 861, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1332

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

DecidedFebruary 8, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 280 A.D.2d 332 (People v. Stanley) 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. Stanley, 280 A.D.2d 332, 719 N.Y.S.2d 861, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1332 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Edward Davidowitz, J.), rendered March 17, 1998, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted robbery in the first degree and reckless endangerment in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 12V2 years and 3V2 to 7 years, unanimously affirmed.

The record establishes that defendant received meaningful representation (see, People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-714). Counsel’s summation effectively emphasized the weaknesses and inconsistencies in the People’s proof as part of a coherent strategy directed at casting doubt on the complainant’s credibility. Counsel made an appropriate strategic decision to forgo fingerprint testing of the physical evidence in order to avoid the risk that the results of such a test would incriminate defendant (People v Yourdon, 142 AD2d 998, lv denied 73 NY2d 791). Concur — Tom, J. P., Andrias, Ellerin, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Edward Davidowitz, J.), rendered March 17, 1998, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted robbery in the first degree and reckless endangerment in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 12V2 years and 3V2 to 7 years, unanimously affirmed.

The record establishes that defendant received meaningful representation (see, People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-714). Counsel’s summation effectively emphasized the weaknesses and inconsistencies in the People’s proof as part of a coherent strategy directed at casting doubt on the complainant’s credibility. Counsel made an appropriate strategic decision to forgo fingerprint testing of the physical evidence in order to avoid the risk that the results of such a test would incriminate defendant (People v Yourdon, 142 AD2d 998, lv denied 73 NY2d 791). Concur — Tom, J. P., Andrias, Ellerin, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

280 A.D.2d 332, 719 N.Y.S.2d 861, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1332, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-stanley-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack