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. Wendell HENDRICKS, Defendant-Appellant.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Denis Boyle, J.), entered on or about March 27, 1996, which denied, after a hearing, defendant's motion to vacate the judgment of the same court (Elbert Hinkson, J.), rendered April 23, 1990, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, and as subsequently modified by this Court, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal sale of marijuana in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent prison terms of 5 to 10 years and 1 year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.
The hearing court properly denied defendant's motion to vacate the judgment made on the ground of ineffective assistance of counsel. According due deference to the hearing court's determinations of fact and credibility, we find that trial counsel's opening statement was based on his anticipation that defendant would testify and counsel's comments regarding defendant's prior “conflict with the law” constituted a reasonable effort to minimize the possible prejudicial impact of such evidence (People v. Redor, 161 A.D.2d 736, 555 N.Y.S.2d 870, lv. denied 76 N.Y.2d 863, 560 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 561 N.E.2d 903). In these circumstances, trial counsel's comments in summation regarding defendant's failure to testify constituted sound trial tactics (see, People v. Abbott, 178 A.D.2d 281, 577 N.Y.S.2d 370, lv. denied 79 N.Y.2d 918, 582 N.Y.S.2d 78, 590 N.E.2d 1206). A review of the record as a whole demonstrates that defendant received effective assistance of counsel at trial (People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400).
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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: October 28, 1997
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)