People v. Velez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Velez

149 A.D.2d 447, 542 N.Y.S.2d 981, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4420

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

DecidedApril 3, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 149 A.D.2d 447 (People v. Velez) 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. Velez, 149 A.D.2d 447, 542 N.Y.S.2d 981, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4420 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Zittell, J.), rendered May 17, 1985, convicting him of robbery in the second degree and grand larceny in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he was not denied his constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel. Defense counsel afforded the defendant "meaningful representation” (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147; People v Chang, 129 AD2d 722, lv denied 70 NY2d 644), as evidenced, inter alia, by his pretrial motion practice, his presentation of cogent identification and alibi defenses, and his thorough and searching cross-examination of prosecution witnesses (see, e.g., People v Hewlett, 71 NY2d 841). Mollen, P. J., Kooper, Sullivan and Harwood, 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 County Court, Westchester County (Zittell, J.), rendered May 17, 1985, convicting him of robbery in the second degree and grand larceny in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he was not denied his constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel. Defense counsel afforded the defendant "meaningful representation” (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147; People v Chang, 129 AD2d 722, lv denied 70 NY2d 644), as evidenced, inter alia, by his pretrial motion practice, his presentation of cogent identification and alibi defenses, and his thorough and searching cross-examination of prosecution witnesses (see, e.g., People v Hewlett, 71 NY2d 841). Mollen, P. J., Kooper, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

149 A.D.2d 447, 542 N.Y.S.2d 981, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4420, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-velez-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack