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. MARCUS BURKE, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (Penal Law § 265.03 [1] [b]; [3]). The charges arose after defendant pointed a gun in the direction of the victim and pursued the victim for a short period of time with his gun drawn. We affirm.
We reject defendant's contention that a Facebook image of defendant depicting him wearing the same clothes as the perpetrator wore at the time of the incident was not properly authenticated. The authenticity of the image was established by the testimony of a witness who had personal knowledge of defendant and who verified that the image “accurately represented the subject matter depicted” (People v Byrnes, 33 NY2d 343, 347 [1974]; see People v Jordan, 181 AD3d 1248, 1249-1250 [4th Dept 2020], lv denied 35 NY3d 1067 [2020]; see generally People v Thomas, 176 AD3d 1639, 1641 [4th Dept 2019], lv denied 34 NY3d 1082 [2019]).
We reject defendant's contention that he was denied effective assistance of counsel (see generally People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]). We conclude that the evidence, the law, and the circumstances of this case, viewed in totality and as of the time of the representation, reveal that defendant received meaningful representation (see People v Gross, 26 NY3d 689, 696 [2016]; Baldi, 54 NY2d at 147).
Finally, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.
Entered: February 7, 2025
Ann Dillon Flynn
Clerk of the Court
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.
Docket No: 2
Decided: February 07, 2025
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth 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)