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. Douglas SMITH, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Joseph Fisch, J. on CPL 190.50(5)(c) motion; Megan Tallmer, J. at jury trial and sentence), rendered May 2, 2000, convicting defendant of criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to three concurrent terms of 5 to 10 years, unanimously affirmed.
Even assuming the truth of defendant's allegations concerning counsel's failure to effectuate his request to testify before the Grand Jury, such failure does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel warranting dismissal of the indictment (People v. Wiggins, 89 N.Y.2d 872, 873, 653 N.Y.S.2d 91, 675 N.E.2d 845; People v. Brooks, 258 A.D.2d 527, 685 N.Y.S.2d 273, lv. denied 93 N.Y.2d 967, 695 N.Y.S.2d 53, 716 N.E.2d 1098).
Since defendant made only a generalized objection, his current challenge to a comment made by the prosecutor during summation is not preserved for review (People v. Clarke, 81 N.Y.2d 777, 593 N.Y.S.2d 784, 609 N.E.2d 137; People v. Balls, 69 N.Y.2d 641, 511 N.Y.S.2d 586, 503 N.E.2d 1017), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that this isolated statement does not warrant reversal, particularly in light of the court's instructions (see, People v. D'Alessandro, 184 A.D.2d 114, 118-119, 591 N.Y.S.2d 1001, lv. denied 81 N.Y.2d 884, 597 N.Y.S.2d 945, 613 N.E.2d 977; Bates v. United States, 403 A.2d 1159, 1162-1163).
Defendant's claim that the procedure by which he was adjudicated a second felony offender did not satisfy the requirements of CPL 400.21 requires preservation (People v. Oliver, 63 N.Y.2d 973, 483 N.Y.S.2d 992, 473 N.E.2d 242), and we decline to review this unpreserved claim in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that there was satisfactory compliance with the statute (see, People v. Bouyea, 64 N.Y.2d 1140, 490 N.Y.S.2d 724, 480 N.E.2d 338).
Defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: February 19, 2002
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)