People v. Sykes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sykes

280 A.D.2d 689, 721 N.Y.S.2d 255, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1847

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

DecidedFebruary 26, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 280 A.D.2d 689 (People v. Sykes) 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. Sykes, 280 A.D.2d 689, 721 N.Y.S.2d 255, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1847 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Marrero, J.), rendered March 5, 1998, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel. Under the totality of the circumstances, the defendant’s attorney provided meaningful representation (see, People v Lee, 129 AD2d 587).

The defendant’s contention that the trial court failed to instruct the jury that the lesser-included offenses should be considered only in the alternative is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Flowers, 274 AD2d 523). In any event, although the jury recorded verdicts of guilty for both the greater [690]*690and lesser-included offenses on the verdict sheet, the trial court clarified, before discharging the jury, that it intended to find the defendant guilty of the greater offenses. The trial court properly recorded and accepted as the final verdict the verdict as to those counts only (see, CPL 310.80; People v Greenfield, 70 AD2d 662, 663). Goldstein, J. P., Florio, Luciano and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Marrero, J.), rendered March 5, 1998, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel. Under the totality of the circumstances, the defendant’s attorney provided meaningful representation (see, People v Lee, 129 AD2d 587).

The defendant’s contention that the trial court failed to instruct the jury that the lesser-included offenses should be considered only in the alternative is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Flowers, 274 AD2d 523). In any event, although the jury recorded verdicts of guilty for both the greater [690]*690and lesser-included offenses on the verdict sheet, the trial court clarified, before discharging the jury, that it intended to find the defendant guilty of the greater offenses. The trial court properly recorded and accepted as the final verdict the verdict as to those counts only (see, CPL 310.80; People v Greenfield, 70 AD2d 662, 663). Goldstein, J. P., Florio, Luciano and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

280 A.D.2d 689, 721 N.Y.S.2d 255, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1847, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sykes-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack