Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Melvin WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Felice Shea, J., on CPL 190.50 motion; Edwin Torres, J., at jury trial and sentence), rendered November 18, 1997, convicting defendant of assault in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to two concurrent terms of 15 years concurrent with a term of 7 years, unanimously affirmed.
After a thorough hearing, at which there was ample evidence that several of the People's witnesses were in grave and legitimate fear of an identified group of relatives and friends of defendant who had appeared together at the trial, the court properly excluded that group during the testimony of those witnesses (see, People v. Li, 91 N.Y.2d 913, 669 N.Y.S.2d 527, 692 N.E.2d 558). The People established an overriding interest justifying the exclusion ordered by the court. While defendant currently claims that the hearing evidence only justified exclusion of particular relatives and that the closure was overbroad, his objection to closure failed to apprise the trial court of those claims. Accordingly, those claims are unpreserved (see, People v. Nieves, 90 N.Y.2d 426, 430, 660 N.Y.S.2d 858, 683 N.E.2d 764), and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find that the court tailored its ruling as narrowly as possible.
Considering the totality of circumstances, trial counsel's failure to effectuate defendant's right to testify before the Grand Jury did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel (People v. Wiggins, 89 N.Y.2d 872, 653 N.Y.S.2d 91, 675 N.E.2d 845). We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining claims in this regard.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
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.
Decided: September 26, 2000
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)