PEOPLE v. RODRIGUEZ (2018)

Court of Appeals of New York.

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. William RODRIGUEZ, Appellant.

No. 111 SSM 13

Decided: June 07, 2018

Powers & Santola, LLP, Albany (Michael J. Hutter of counsel), for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York City (Sheila L. Bautista of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. Defendant's ineffective assistance of counsel claim lacks merit. Even assuming that counsel failed to assert a meritorious Confrontation Clause challenge, the alleged omission does not “involve an issue that [was] so clear-cut and dispositive that no reasonable defense counsel would have failed to assert it,” and defendant has not demonstrated on the record “that the decision to forgo the contention could not have been grounded in a legitimate trial strategy” (People v. McGee, 20 N.Y.3d 513, 518, 964 N.Y.S.2d 73, 986 N.E.2d 907 [2013]; see People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400 [1981]; cf. People v. Turner, 5 N.Y.3d 476, 481, 806 N.Y.S.2d 154, 840 N.E.2d 123 [2005] ).

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, in a memorandum.

MEMORANDUM.

Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera, Stein, Fahey, Garcia, Wilson and Feinman concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network