PEOPLE v. LOTT (2004)

Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him following a jury trial of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 165.45[5] ) and unauthorized use of a vehicle in the third degree (§ 165.05[1] ).   We reject the contention of defendant that he was denied effective assistance of counsel when defense counsel elicited a statement from a witness concerning defendant's criminal history (see generally People v. Hobot, 84 N.Y.2d 1021, 1022, 622 N.Y.S.2d 675, 646 N.E.2d 1102).   Contrary to that contention, defendant received effective representation.   His counsel vigorously cross-examined witnesses, entered timely and reasoned objections throughout the trial and made appropriate motions on behalf of defendant (see People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 674 N.Y.S.2d 629, 697 N.E.2d 584).   Additionally, any prejudice that would have otherwise befallen defendant as a result of the statement was alleviated by Supreme Court's curative instruction (see People v. Mims, 278 A.D.2d 822, 823, 717 N.Y.S.2d 446, lv. denied 96 N.Y.2d 832, 729 N.Y.S.2d 453, 754 N.E.2d 213).   We also reject the contention of defendant that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence (see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672).

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

MEMORANDUM: